Another Chemtrail Question

Hello All,

I'm a new member and I've been testing the waters by participating in a few topics; I greatly appreciate the repartee and send warm greetings to everyone.

A topic that is near and dear to my heart is the “chemtrail” phenomenon, and I've been posting in one of the threads currently bouncing around the forums. As a new member I’ve been reluctant to post my own thread, because of the dizzying array of posts already out there and all the good ones seem to be not so much taken, as taken and argued to a bloody pulp, so I apologize in advance if I’m stealing someone's thunder or if this should be under Rants as opposed to wherever it is it ended up.

Here’s the nutshell:

I noticed a big difference in the appearance of contrails in the last decade, especially the last several years where they expand and cover the sky with haze every day. I have lived all over the country and never noticed contrails behaving like this, (save perhaps B52s in the 60s), and I’ve lived in Oregon for the last 30 years and only noticed the marked difference in contrails in the last decade. They now cover the sky and they appear to be laid down deliberately. Without a doubt, something had changed, so only when I noticed the difference did I begin to learn about the chemtrail phenomenon.

One of the things I notice about many of the chemtrail threads is that they devolve into discussions about minutiae which tend to derail the conversation; so I’d like to avoid the details and just focus the time frame and photographic evidence.

I’ve read that the spraying began in the late 90s and as early as 1990. That sounds about right based on my own experience. If this is a phenomenon that I somehow missed when I was growing up, it should be visible in photographs and movies somewhere. I know they don’t appear in any of the photos of my childhood and youth, not that they would always be there, but I do catch them in the photos and videos I take these days; you can’t seem take a photo or video which includes a patch of sky without catching one.

Has anyone researched this and compiled a list of photos that show contrails behaving like they do today? There must be movies that include them; I know they are included in some recent cartoons and video games, but how about Hollywood? Can any film fans dig out some old videos from the 80s and show us skies that look like they have chemtrails in them? How about newer films? Are they there and when did they start showing up?

I’ve done a bunch of searches for photos from the 80s for example, specifically for outdoors shots that might include the sky…concerts, air shows and the like. The only thing I’ve noticed is that the skies look better in those shots than they do today, and nowhere can I find an example of what we describe as a chemtrail today, and certainly not grids and lines like we see today.

Photos anyone? I can’t find any chemtrail photos from the 20th century.

Again, if this is an old, well worn topic, sorry I missed it.

I wish you luck in this, however, I think you might have a hard time with this. If you are really interested, I would contact the leading folk who are researching and making presentations on the topic.

Yes ther is a site that provides a lot of what you ask for - contrailscience.com...

there's a lot to read there - I suggest looking through the articles before delving into any of their threads - pretty much every question ever asked about contrails, and every theory about chemtrails, is covered in an amazingly patient and logical manner.

Contrail photos through history - well at least since photography and high flying aircraft have been around in significant nubmers! It is a contrail science page showing some photos pre the start of the chemtrail hoax in the late 1990's.

Edit - here's a specific photo of 30 or so contrails from a book published in 1967 - contrail science page

If you are a fan of the Battle of Britain movie from 1969 apparently there is a contrail visible in one of the final dogfights.

now this is what i am talking about. Every movie it seems has chem-trails in them when they show outdoor scenes. This summer the kool-aid commercial. the begining of the tv show -the pawn shop-many others. I dig westerns and i chalange any of you to find a chem-trail in a movie made befor 1990.

Come on WEEDWACKER try to back up all the bull you have been spreading on here-
great question op and thanks--

Its global dimming-project cloverleaf

Originally posted by Yankee451
I’d like to avoid the details and just focus the time frame

As far as time frame is concerned, as the years go by, the population increases, more planes are built, more planes are flying in the air. Planes are flying higher, thus keeping their contrails in the air longer.

So, 20-30 years ago, there weren't as many planes in the skies, thus there weren't as many contrails. It isn't rocket science.

Originally posted by Yankee451
and photographic evidence.

I'll show some photographic evidence:


[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/85768ed635ee.jpg[/atsimg]


One of the main "proofs" of "chemtrails" is that they stay in the sky and just spread and don't dissipate. Well, if contrails are being called "chemtrails" in part by that alone, then the above image of clouds also has to be called "chemtrails" as contrails that stay in the sky and clouds are exactly the same thing. They are both frozen, crystallized water vapor.

Clouds and contrails are made up of the same exact thing: water vapor. Thus they will both hang and stay in the sky, both spread out in the sky, and both will dissipate when evaporated.


You don't get a much easier explanation than that.

reply to post by Yankee451


I guess the easiest thing to do, is to repeat what I posted in another thread....yes, I just copied it, rather than re-typing the whole thing again:


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The MAIN difference, from the 1970s and now? The engines.

Please research into the:

• Turbojet
  
• Low-bypass Turbofan
  
• High-bypass Turbofan
  

That is the order of technology development. The earliest "straight" turbojets, common mostly on fighters and only a few early commercial jets, produced all of their thrust from the exhaust gases. The pattern of the airflows, and the efficiency of the fuel burning process was very different.

And, they were gas-guzzlers.

Then, the Turbofan was developed....most iconic is the Pratt & Whitney JT-9D. Used on the Boeing 707, 727, and early 737. And the early DC-9. All (low bypass) designs. Their contrails were more common than from the straight turbojet engines, but still wouldn't always form cohesively. Only under a more narrow range of conditions would they persist for any time.

Larger jets, widebodies, as they were developed meant more powerful engine technology...and thus, the HIGH-bypass turbofan designs. The majority...anywhere form 80 to about 90% and more of the thrust comes from the huge fan, out in front...acts just like a multi-bladed propeller. In a shroud, which increases its efficiency.

These engines are very fuel efficient, and have different exhaust characteristics and final temperatures. (Cooler).

And, THAT is what makes the contrails formed by these engines much, much more prevalent, and longer lasting. In fact, in a way, it harkens back to the days of WWII, and the era before jets, the 1950s....with the BIG piston engines, and big propellers. The props produced a column of air that surrounded and enveloped the exhaust gases, much as the big turbofan fans do today. And, the exhaust temps of piston engines are lower than most early jet engines...but, the newer jets are closer, nowadays. ALL of these factors combine...to include the retirement of the older types of engines, AND the large increase in overall jet traffic as well.

Have you seen the examples from WWII? Was quite a problem for the Allies, late in the War, as they began daytime bombing raids into Axis territory. At night, contrails can't be seen...but daytime, they were terrible as they drew unwanted attention:




See above, about this:

.

I know they don’t appear in any of the photos of my childhood and youth, not that they would always be there, but I do catch them in the photos and videos I take these days; you can’t seem take a photo or video which includes a patch of sky without catching one.

There must be movies that include them.

I'm afraid it's that simple. Changing engine design, combined with MORE airplanes. And, selective memories in some cases, from people's personal recollections of their pasts.

Cars also make contrails on the ground:


[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/73850fe60d26.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/850f984a4b0f.jpg[/atsimg]


Due to the difference in air density, humidity, and temperature at ground level and up where planes fly, is why the contrail from your car evaporates alot faster than a plane's. Not to mention the amount of water vapor from your car's tailpipe is very small compared to a large jet engine.

If you could drive your car across the sky where planes fly, you would see the exact same contrails going across the sky, hanging out and spreading out. Again, not rocket science.

Here's a flikr search for contrail tagged photos taken after 1/1/1985 and before 1/1/1990 - there's only a handful but you can extend the date range if you want.

Be a bit careful tho - some digital camera default to 1/1/1980 so I think show that date if they havent' been reset - I found a couple then that were taken by camera types that didn't exist at teh time!

Originally posted by itsawild1
I dig westerns and i chalange any of you to find a chem-trail in a movie made befor 1990.

I believe this is from Patton, made in 1970




Mind you according to the 2nd post of this thread www.abovetopsecret.com... these are beign back-added into the movies to convince us we've been seeing them all along......

weedwacker cant explain that here in the boonies of wisconsin we have no major air traffic TILL the chem-trailing planes star flying then some days a hundred planes go over??? every 10 minutes?? then when a front from the south comes-no planes for days??? [ after all why spray for canada] then the fronts change to a eastern -southern or eastern change and WOW here they come again!!!
SO obvious----global diming project simply put.

The ice pack is the lowest this winter then ever in the north, Mid and eastern canada was 39 degrees above normal for december and first half of january??? [ seems canada dosnt shem-trail like we do] and since they chem=trailed the crap out of us, you saw it works by our cool temps for the most part of the country.

global dimming project You can pull that different plane engine stuff on a city person but not on a country man of 55 years WEEDWACKER - but i will say your a good shill.

Is that because country men of 55 years know everything there is to know about Jet engines?

whereas I'm a city slicker who has only been an aircraft mechanic for 36 years and knows nothing about them so I'm easy to fool, along with all the other mechanics and engineers and pilots and meteorologists and atmospheric scientists around the world as well?

As an appeal to authority on the physics of the atmosphere and jet engines, claiming to living in the countryside for 55 years seems a little thin. Sorry dude.

reply to post by itsawild1


Silly....I have, many many times, explained. I gave links for people to look, for themselves....

weedwacker cant explain that here in the boonies of wisconsin we have no major air traffic.

Maybe a cute little video will sink in?

TILL the chem-trailing planes star flying then some days a hundred planes go over???

There is NO such thing. Then, think hard about what else you wrote, there...."hundred"?


Now, eyeroll, because we keep telling you that THIS is how weather works!!:

...then when a front from the south comes-no planes for days???

NO...same airplanes flying, but the FACT of the weather front passage changes the Relative Humidity, and thus, no (or fewer) contrails!

SO obvious----global dimming project simply put.

No flipping thing exists!!! Haven't you been reading these threads? Plenty of reasons put forth as to the impossibility of such an imaginary "project."

Your "ice-pack" rants don't even make any sense!!! You complain there's not as much snow as "normal" (what's that, anyway??) and, same time claim "global dimming"!?!

Don't you see the contradiction?? The nonsense of "global dimming" would tend to COVER the Earth with a layer of shade, right? So, is it cooler in the Sun, or the shade??

And, this is just downright rude! If I wasn't your contemporary in age, I would be more offended:

- but i will say your a good shill.

Besides against ATS T&Cs (ad hominem).....it is just so disgusting the types of ignorance that persist on this topic.....and I've got something that few here, on ATS can claim....almost forty years flying experience. To see gullible, and ill-informed people fall for such an obvious HOAX as "chem"-trails, when you have the knowledge and life experience to know better, is just heart breaking......

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


Thanks for the links, that's helpful to show that persistent contrails existed in '67, but the photo appears to have been taken of the sky after a flight of military jets in formation. I already mentioned I remembered the B52s from the 60s, and odds are good that if you took a shot of the same sky a couple hours later those contrails would be gone.

I'm looking more for examples of the grids or parallel lines made by commercial aircraft, like we have today.

I'm wondering if weather and radar records can be compared too.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


There you go, thanks. That's how I remember them, high in the sky and it would probably be gone in a couple hours...

I'm thinking a sports event or an outdoor concert might be able to show images of the sky over time, so we can see how persistent a persistent contrail was in the seventies.

Nice find, thanks again.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


One of the captions in your link states:

"A cold morning in Kensington Gardens (resulting in a sky full of contrails), London, England"

This sounds about right. It is because I always associated colder crisper days with contrails that I started wondering why they suddenly began blocking the sun on hot cloudless days.

reply to post by _BoneZ_


You gave me a picture of ice fog which tends to hover over the ground with the right inversion conditions, and it's poisonous...I'm not sure why you included that, but if you were trying to make me feel better about chemtrails by telling me they're just bigger and better ice fog, it didn't work.

I didn't notice any persistent contrails in your picture though; no grids or lines expanding out to block the sun. What was the date of the photo?

Originally posted by alyoshablue
I wish you luck in this, however, I think you might have a hard time with this. If you are really interested, I would contact the leading folk who are researching and making presentations on the topic.

Or just wait and see what awesomeness comes to the table. Awesome work, guys.

TO ANY AND ALL PEOPLE WHO SAY THEY SEE LINES AND GRIDS AS THOUGH THEY ARE DELIBERATE:

Get a grip. Follow through on the logic. Think a bit for yourself.

A plane following a N-S route leaving a contrail will leave a contrail going N-S
A plane following a E-W route leaving a contrail will leave a contrail going E-W

If the contrails are persistent, they will cross.
If there is drift due to wind, and more than one plane flying on those routes, the lines will look like a grid.

If on top of all this a plane flying NE-SW leave a contrail, it will cross the above lines at an angle. It will make a triangle.
What people don't seem to remember if they see "chemtrails" is that planes fly to all points of the compass, and therefore so will contrails. It's not a deliberate pattern, it's planes following a route laid out for planes to fly.
For this to be some sort of deliberate targeting attempt (the only reason I can think of to lay a planned grid for whatever reason, but hey, I don't think like a "chemtrailer") they would also have to control both wind and gravity.
Wind because the trails will be blown away and around, gravity because a trail particle size is so small that it's terminal velocity shows it won't settle to the ground for at least 24 hours, most likely much longer.
And being in the middle of nowhere with no airports nearby does not mean your skies will not have planes flying over your head.
That this is such basic logic and shows no attempt at finding an answer for themselves, I find fascinating. It's simple logic people. Yet at least one time a day I have found someone making the same silly claim.
I actually researched and made a video about it for YouTube:

reply to post by stars15k


I've already said they're not persistent contrails which follow the flight paths we're familiar with; I started this thread because most of these the conversations devolve into discussions of the same minutiae. I was hoping to find examples of photos or preferably movies (like from sporting events, car races, air shows, concerts, etc.) which display the grids and parallel lines expanding to create a haze. A movie of an outdoor concert for example could show persistent contrails expanding to form clouds, or dissipating over time, but what I'd really like to see is anything that shows the grids and lines expanding to form a sky covering haze on a hot day.

I doubt any exist from the eighties for example, but I bet some can be found from after 2000.

reply to post by stars15k


Just going to say a couple of things about that video. First, how far can you see on a clear day to high altitude? Isn't it about 200 miles or so? In which case, a 100 mile (or bigger) radius circle around your chosen location would give an idea of just how many of those lines would cross your observable area.

Second, wow, it really would stop a good amount of air traffic if Yellowstone erupted, wouldn't it?