Chemtrails?
6 2010-07-21 by Pfmohr2
So, I've attempted to do my own research into this subject, and I've so far had a hard time finding reputable sources of information on the subject. I'm genuinely interested in learning more, but need some pointers on where to start, and if possible some links to reputable sources of information. Help me out here /r/conspiracy!
Edit So basically what I am getting is that there is no actual evidence for this. Plenty of strong beliefs, but no evidence at all...
58 comments
7 [deleted] 2010-07-21
Working hypothesis: Condensation from jet engines.
1 Outofmany 2010-07-21
Basic difference: Contrails dissipate within minutes; chemtrails last hours. I don't claim to believe the chemtrail hypothesis, but I know that the one point that the "chemtrailers" have going is that there is a huge difference.
4 [deleted] 2010-07-21
[deleted]
1 Outofmany 2010-07-21
Perhaps you are right, but I can't really say one way or another. Maybe you're in a better position to look into the issue than most of us. Did you see the video of the jet that looked like it was spraying crops at 15 thousand feet?
1 Slipgrid 2010-07-21
Well, seems the goal is to cool the Earth, so they wouldn't be very useful at night or when there is already cloud cover.
I've seen them over Cincinnati. You can watch commercial airlines going into CVG, or just flying over, and they leave a normal contrail. But, some days, you can watch planes flying in circles leaving these trails. I've watched the same plane for two hours painting the sky, while normal air-traffic leaves normal contrails.
1 lightspeed23 2010-07-21
The plane you're watching is at a different altitude so its contrails look different and/or persists longer. I could be doing areal photography or any other number of activity or policing etc.
4 pwncore 2010-07-21
Don't just downvote people that ask for evidence or lack thereof, I've always considered this subreddit to be somewhat of a bastion of the anti-hivemind policy.
There was a documentary I saw some time ago on the subject, There are probably many. The evidence presented for was collected samples of air and ground that showed traces of heavy metals and biological agents not native to the area, However, You would really have to test before and after, and verify that testing to be accurate.
The best evidence I've seen for the case against chemtrails was this - All planes are tracked by the airport they launch from, you can verify if a plane is commercial, private, or sometimes military. If you think that this may be something you are concerned about, try to get in contact with people in your area who track planes and who they are registered to.
There is a good chance that a lot of "chemtrails" are indeed contrails, or those that have a military purpose are using certain kinds of fuel that don't behave as normal commercial fuels do. The best way to go about proving this theory would be to collect data off all kinds - Samples, flight data, and anything I might have missed.
1 Pfmohr2 2010-07-21
But is there actual evidence out there right now, that won't require me going and doing the actual testing? I see people who so strongly believe this is fact, and claim mass amounts of evidence that is easy to find if I just "do the research", yet I've not found anything.
6 pwncore 2010-07-21
You asking me as though you expect me to be an expert. I attempt to be as objective as possible. From my post you could probably infer that I have not done the necessary research myself to state wither it has or has not been done in adequacy.
A large problem surrounding this issue, like many others, is dismissal based on preconceived notions - Social prejudices. If there is no "credible" person willing to do the research, how will it ever be proven or dis proven? Here we reach somewhat of an impasse, for if research is done by the wrong people - It is discredited due to prejudice, However, if no one 'credible' is willing to verify or peer review the results - How can we ever come to a solution?
Personally most of the evidence I have briefly reviewed does not meet my own satisfactions of proof, but that doesn't mean I will bias myself against the theory, only suspend judgment and advocate that idea - that better work should be done to either claim a theory as 'proven' or 'nonsense'.
3 Pfmohr2 2010-07-21
That is a shockingly well-reasoned answer.
1 [deleted] 2010-07-21
[deleted]
4 Pfmohr2 2010-07-21
I've been to Carnicom before, I just have too many issues with what it presents as "evidence."
Take the front page, for example. We have a series of (rather oddly-formatted) links at the top, but we'll set those aside for a moment. Following that, we have 6 thumbnails titled "Aerosol Progression." It is inferred that these are chemtrails, but with no supporting evidence (and they seem to be contrails exhibiting known behavior from what I can see). Below that, a picture of the Grand Canyon, titled "'Ideal' Weather Conditions." No exposition, but I assume we are to take the haziness of the picture as evidence of chemtrails?
Honestly, its not fair to judge a book by its cover, and there are a fairly extensive collection of links on the page. A good deal have to do with Morgellons (an as-of-yet undefined collection of symptoms) which it attributes to chemtrail operations in the US. Honestly, the whole Morgellons deal is a big can of worms that will only serve to remove focus from this research, so lets put it aside for now.
What I'm looking for is verifiable research which shows direct evidence of chemtrail activity. Ideally, we would be able to find this under the "sampling and analysis" link. When we click it, we are presented with a few tests on samples (mixed in with a healthy dose of "global warming" sections and various other links which do not pertain to analysis of collected samples).
So, this would seem to be some sort of concrete evidence. Indeed, when we look at several of the sample analysis links, we see samples being studied rather scientifically (microscopic study, oil immersion microscopic studies, etc). So far, so good, right?
Now, here's where they lose me. The second sentence of "sub-micron particles isolated" reads as follows:
The study in question involves the collection and isolation of small fibers from an indoor, whole-house ionic filtration system. At no point is there any real suggestion of the origins of said fibers, and yet the article itself opens with an erroneous claim as to the origins of the fibers in question. This is a problem in terms of the legitimacy of this study, and it is a common thread through virtually all of the "sampling an analysis" links that have to do with actual scientific obeservations.
Yes, several of these studies do show measurable amounts of heavy metals/salts/unknown material in the air and ground. But, without fail, each one attributes these materials to "chemtrail operations" without any corroborating evidence.
I do appreciate the link, and have looked into carnicom's links extensively before, but while interesting they simply provide no actual evidence of chemtrail operations.
I am still willing to look into any other links provided, with the hopes of some legitimate evidence being presented.
-3 stringerbell 2010-07-21
'bastion of the anti-hivemind'
Ummm, excuse me?!??!?!?
I've been following r/conspiracy for literally years - and for the life of me I can't think of even a single posting that wasn't complete and utter (easily disproven) crap and lies! Not one...
7 pwncore 2010-07-21
I think you may be exaggerating, and also intentionally ignorant. Perhaps simply a troll.
http://www.georgewashington2.blogspot.com/2010/07/senior-epa-analyst-government-agencies.html
http://conspiraciesthatweretrue.blogspot.com/2007/01/list-of-proven-conspiracies-from.html
http://digital.library.miami.edu/gov/FDRAssn.html
http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20100714/ARTICLES/100719809/1033
About the above link, Bohemian Grove was denied to be a meeting place of top officials for occult rituals, until it was broken into and exposed.
There are a variety of good links, Most of them are blogs or opinion pieces, the same as any other site that focuses on politics. You could make the same unfounded claim about "Everything being utter crap and lies" about any political subreddit.
2 Nobody_special 2010-07-21
I think there are many trolls here. In fact I am seeing more and more disinformation on many comment systems. This stuff has been known for years.
3 [deleted] 2010-07-21
Your presence in the comments as well as the post your responding to are both evidence of the quote you're arguing against.
4 pilot_wave 2010-07-21
A good conspiracy theory requires both an interesting subject, and an apparent lack of explanation for its occurrence/existence. The chemtrails conspiracy fails the second qualification miserably.
The physical mechanism by which contrails form is well understood, well documented, and thoroughly available. If you fly an aircraft at a certain speed with a certain amount of humidity in the air, there is no way you won't form a contrail. There's no mystery, no place for a good conspiracy to form. It's unnecessary paranoia expressing itself in a place it doesn't belong.
2 entropy_police 2010-07-21
If you are having issues with getting a good conspiracy to form, just spread more condensation nuclei into a humid section of atmosphere, increasing the chance of conspiracy formation.
1 pilot_wave 2010-07-21
Brilliant! We'll spread them using commercial airliners...
2 apefist 2010-07-21
Explain contrails with low humidity, then. Contrails dissipate rather quickly, and they most certainly don't linger for 10 minutes or more. Not saying I buy into the chemtrails theory, but weather modification and cloud seeding take place regularly. Here's a company that openly promotes its cloud seeding operation:
http://www.weathermodification.com/cloud-seeding-aerial.php
img: http://www.weathermodification.com/images/img_cs_a_3.jpg
6 pilot_wave 2010-07-21
Solid point on the cloud seeding. I certainly don't mean to deny that cloud-seeding exists and occurs on a regular basis. It's certainly not an evil conspiracy, although its effects have been debated for several decades now. I consider it to be separate from the chemtrails conspiracy which is rather less grounded in fact.
It's not possible to form contrails below a certain humidity for a given temperature. Keep in mind though that the humidity and temperature on the ground and at 30k+ feet in altitude may vary wildly at any given point.
There's no reason that they can't. Contrails will persist until solar irradiation warms the condensed water vapor, or until prevailing winds disperse them. Common atmospheric conditions most probably align to prevent contrails lasting more than a few minutes, but there is nothing that says that they must.
7 [deleted] 2010-07-21
I've seen contrails that last way longer than 10 minutes, left behind by regular commercial planes. There are hundreds or thousands of people working on keeping these planes in the air (mechanics, pilots, etc) - it would be rather challenging to keep a conspiracy secret.
2 Outofmany 2010-07-21
There are photos of chemtrails and contrails occurring simultaneously. One dissipates the other doesn't.
2 Pfmohr2 2010-07-21
Same time != same place. Just because two aircraft contrails are shown in the same photo does not mean they are particularly close or share the same atmospheric conditions.
1 Outofmany 2010-07-21
OK I officially hate this issue. No real research, the case is too easy to make and too easy to dismiss. Yet people I find reputable continue to make the claim.
1 Pfmohr2 2010-07-21
Define reputable?
That's kinda my whole point I guess. There are lots - lots - of claims floating around out there. Despite this, I've yet to see any hard evidence in support of this theory.
I guess this one is a bit of common sense. If aircraft are close enough to be in the same photo, they are not going to be routed close to each other in terms of altitude. Even supposed sinister government agents don't have death wishes.
Anyways, atmospheric conditions can be influenced by so, so many factors, altitude among them, and it is almost a guarantee that conditions will no be exactly the same at different altitudes.
1 Slipgrid 2010-07-21
The thread is not about contrails.
1 lightspeed23 2010-07-21
You're one of THEM!
4 KainX 2010-07-21
theres videos of unmarked planes laying a perfect tic tac toe patterns all over youtube. you actually see the planes turn around to make more and more passes.
1 lightspeed23 2010-07-21
Couldn't this just be planes doing areal photography? those planes need to fly in patterns like that.
3 tamrix 2010-07-21
Well whatever this is for i'm sure it has nothing to do with it.
1 [deleted] 2010-07-21
http://www.evergreenaviation.com/
Learn to internet.
2 jewdea 2010-07-21
Ironically, I'm listening to an interview with John Lear on IntelHub radio that talked about Evergreen Aviation and how it is a blatant CIA front.
1 [deleted] 2010-07-21
Sorry for the late reply, Well fortunately these planes are made to spray approx, 1ton of sulfur dioxide i believe the fatal dose is 2250 ppm per hour with a odor threshold of .05ppm so it would reek of sulfur before it was doing any harm the way people seem to think. In as small doses as you would be receiving it would be best used for anti-biological warfare. Or to affect the temperature of the earth. I am not saying this is correct but it seems the most plausible from my research especially concerning this specific company. I would be more than interested in any other information you might be willing to point me too on this topic.
bigfin question everything!
2 [deleted] 2010-07-21
Here is a pretty good video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bSSWnXQsgOU
3 Pfmohr2 2010-07-21
Saw this one when it was posted, and it appears (to my untrained eye) to be normal contrail formation. Regardless, we can't draw any solid conclusions from this video.
2 Outofmany 2010-07-21
You did see it randomly stop and resume didn't you?
1 apefist 2010-07-21
Contrails don't last in the sky longer than a minute. These stripes in the sky last for 10 minutes or longer. Condensation dissipates rather quickly.
4 bittermanscolon 2010-07-21
or ven beyond that they spread out and over a 30 mins or so they turn into what people think are clouds. That hazy crap you see in the sky next to the white fluffy ones......
0 Pfmohr2 2010-07-21
I don't know why this "fact" keeps getting tossed about, it is thoroughly discredited.
Yes, contrails can linger if atmospheric conditions allow. Yes, they can even act as seeding agents for clouds.
A good litmus test when researching this subject: if the source claims that contrails cannot linger, and cannot assist in cloud formation, it is most likely a non-reputable one.
1 apefist 2010-07-21
Not on low humidity days, friend. The trails left by cloud seeding last much longer than contrails on a dry day.
2 JackFreeman1 2010-07-21
read this transcript from a government website: http://www.defense.gov/transcripts/transcript.aspx?transcriptid=674
2 Superconducter 2010-07-21
Keywords. Aluminum oxide Barium, Geo engineering, Over the horizon communications and imaging , Chaff, Albedo.
2 [deleted] 2010-07-21
Wasn't there a photo showing the inside of one of the chemtrail planes recently?
Didn't china catch a plane recently with said equipment onboard?
1 apefist 2010-07-21
Check weather modification and cloud seeding.
http://www.weathermodification.com/cloud-seeding-aerial.php
http://www.google.com/search?btnG=1&pws=0&q=weather+modification,+cloud+seeding
0 Outofmany 2010-07-21
It seems that cloud seeding is mainly done with light aircraft perhaps?
1 Pfmohr2 2010-07-21
Depends. In the US, seeding has been done with small aircraft and by burning materials on the ground. In China they do the same and also use artillery.
No actual examples of using commercial airliners though.
1 apefist 2010-07-21
Check the planes in the link. I saw some big aircraft, too. I don't know that what they seed the clouds with is necessarily harmful, but it's more than condensation vapor. That's all my point is.
0 Pfmohr2 2010-07-21
But cloud seeding is a pretty open, well-understood thing. Both the US and China have been doing it since the 1970's. How would it make sense for them to be constantly seeding clouds over the entire world (as this theory would suggest)?
1 apefist 2010-07-21
But cloud seeding is what causes those lines in the sky which stay longer than a condensation trail does. Condensation trails dissipate quickly. That was my point, nothing sinister. What are they seeding clouds with anyway? Barium?
0 Pfmohr2 2010-07-21
Ehhhh we start getting into semantics here, you are technically right (as the exhaust vapor does "seed" cloud formation), but generally cloud seeding is thought of as an intentional act to induce rainfall from clouds.
In terms of what they use, it varies. In general, silver iodide has been the agent of choice, although frozen carbon dioxide is also fairly common. Propane and salt solutions have also been used to a lesser extent.
In terms of heavy metals like Barium, there just isn't much practical utility to their use for seeding. In fact, if you look into reputable (as in legitimately scientific resources) you won't find any mention of heavy metals being used in cloud seeding at all; they just don't work well.
1 apefist 2010-07-21
That's what the chemtrails folk say they use. Barium and some other stuff that seems a bit extreme. Like I said, I don't know what the effects are, but I've seen some ridiculous pictures before. This one is cool:
http://www.puppetgov.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/chemtrailsfrontsmoke.jpg
1 YarvinTheFish 2010-07-21
If the government were spreading chemicals via aircraft for whatever purpose, why wouldn't they only do it during night flights when it's impossible to see? It seems rather flagrant to have a design where airplanes piss chemicals all over the public.
0 [deleted] 2010-07-21
/me rolls his eyes
0 boristhefish 2010-07-21
I love a good conspiracy as much as the next guy, but sometimes a lack of reputable sources is not the case of a deeper conspiracy but in fact just a lack of anything there at all. Or at least thats what my government handlers told me to say lol.
0 brock_lee 2010-07-21
What would you consider reputable? There are people who say it happens, and people who say it doesn't. The burden to prove the claim is on those that say it happens, but if you can't find a source for that information that's reputable....doesn't that tell you something?
0 Outofmany 2010-07-21
It's funny that if you want to claim that something is up with the airplanes then you're immediately must bear this "burden of proof" but when the establishment tells you that marijuana is bad then the same rules don't apply.
-1 [deleted] 2010-07-21
[deleted]
2 Pfmohr2 2010-07-21
I will gladly watch Top Gun regardless of the reason.
-9 stringerbell 2010-07-21
That's the thing...
You AREN'T - ever - going to find even a single 'REPUTABLE' source for ridiculous lies like these...
0 Outofmany 2010-07-21
It's funny that if you want to claim that something is up with the airplanes then you're immediately must bear this "burden of proof" but when the establishment tells you that marijuana is bad then the same rules don't apply.
1 Pfmohr2 2010-07-21
Depends. In the US, seeding has been done with small aircraft and by burning materials on the ground. In China they do the same and also use artillery.
No actual examples of using commercial airliners though.
1 Pfmohr2 2010-07-21
Define reputable?
That's kinda my whole point I guess. There are lots - lots - of claims floating around out there. Despite this, I've yet to see any hard evidence in support of this theory.
I guess this one is a bit of common sense. If aircraft are close enough to be in the same photo, they are not going to be routed close to each other in terms of altitude. Even supposed sinister government agents don't have death wishes.
Anyways, atmospheric conditions can be influenced by so, so many factors, altitude among them, and it is almost a guarantee that conditions will no be exactly the same at different altitudes.
1 apefist 2010-07-21
But cloud seeding is what causes those lines in the sky which stay longer than a condensation trail does. Condensation trails dissipate quickly. That was my point, nothing sinister. What are they seeding clouds with anyway? Barium?
1 apefist 2010-07-21
Check the planes in the link. I saw some big aircraft, too. I don't know that what they seed the clouds with is necessarily harmful, but it's more than condensation vapor. That's all my point is.