thin wispy mist obsuring sky- chemtrails?

[brunono2]

I thought that claims of chemtrails were a fantasy by conspiracy theorists until the last year. I have noticed with increasing frequency when trying to observe late at night:-
- a thin mist
-Or also very thin "widespread clouds" appearing which cover the sky making it humid.

I am over sixty years old and an amateur astronomer for nearly 40 years and I cannot remember ever seeing such so called clouds some of which are by their shape made by planes

Today was pretty bad with long thin trails looking like they came from aircraft all over the sky some which dissapate into very wispy clouds which are clearly not normal clouds to me- see some photos from my phone today which I took in exasperation

If you read up on chemtrails and Geoengineering + HAARP and look above this might not be so crazy?

We also need to consider all the corruption around in this world- Libor (interest rate fixing), needless wars (Iraq), NSA spying + Bank bailouts burden on taxpayers; No prosecution of financial institutions stealing from customers-eg MF Global, commodity price fixing-all of which benefit big banks and companies before we dismiss the possibility of this being true.

What happened to the ozone layer damage claims which everyone panicked about years ago?- these claims suddenly disappeared without explanation.

It really upsets me as it has ruined many a night of observing.

[stopkillingus]

Hi. Brunono.
I'm glad u r noticing the spraying today was a bad day In Sydney and they do it regularly on clear skies. We need to join our voices and move toward stopping this silent killer.

[sheeny]

Looks like ordinary Cirrus cloud and the occasional CONtrail (condensation trail) to me.

Don't believe the "chemtrail" malarky... its a conspiracy theory.

Al.

[bkm2304]

Couldn't agree more, Sheeny. Good old "bugger - up - your - night" cirrus.

I've been cursing it for 40 years!

Although..... I still don't have a rational explanation as to how politicians talk when they are at Canberra airport. THe garbled nonsense they all speak regardless of party certainly adds weight to the possibility!!!! Somebody told me that it was the Canberra water rather than the chemtrails that makes them behave like this.:lol:

Richard

[andyc]

Yep, 'chemtrails' are just another conspiracy theory, popularised by the ability of any uninformed person being able to publish any old crackpot idea on the Internet. Don't be fooled by it! Put it in a box beside moon landing conspiracies, climate denial, 9-11 troofers, HAARP, Obamas birth certificate, and various other unsupported conspiracy theories. The clouds you've pictured are just a mix of regular cirrus and normal aircraft contrails. There are more contrails than 40 years ago (much more air traffic), but there's nothing sinister in that, and I've rarely seen weather conditions in Australia where contrails have significantly affected sky quality. I saw this more often near popular flight paths in the UK under cold high pressure systems in winter - sky criscrossed by normal contrails that lasted longer because atmospheric conditions were right.

You don't hear about the ozone layer so much because thanks to the Montreal Protocol, we have cut our emissions of CFCs, and so the hole is not growing now, and is beginning to shrink as some of the CFCs come out of the atmosphere - given the residence time of the molecules, this takes decades. Problem identified by science (a 1985 Nature paper) ... action ... solution. The same happened with Y2K, we took action to solve the identified problem, and now you don't hear so much about it.

Clear skies :thumbsup:

[jjjnettie]

Honestly, you think that these pilots are knowingly spraying their own families? And allowing themselves to be sprayed when they are off duty?
LOLOL
The reason there are more contrails today than 40 years ago is because the amount of air traffic has increased by a phenomenal rate.

http://contrailscience.com/

[LewisM]

Chemtrails... I made a few in my aviation career. We generally call it burnt kerosene, generating dihydrogen monoxide and carbon dioxide. Put that dihydrogen monoxide up at say 30,000 ft or so, and that lovely trail of burnt hydrocarbons condenses in the near -37°C rarefied air (depending on lots of variables, but you get my drift). We then call it either a vapour trail or condensation trail.

Cirrus cloud. Yes, indeed another chemical. It's called super chilled Dihydrogen monoxide. REALLY dangerous stuff. Too much, you drown. Too little, you dehydrate and die. Lower down in the atmosphere, we call it rain. Really really bad juju.

In fact, some dihydrogen monoxide just stated falling here from a sky covered in chemtrails.

You have more to worry taking pictures out of car windows than from these horrible chemtrails.

Hmmm, we are doomed - lots more chemtrail precipitation this morning

[brunono2]

Thank you for your responses- they are what I expected
On Saturday morning around 2am I had one of the clearest views of Jupiter with a transit shadow that I have ever seen. The sky was completely clear-when I woke up on Saturday morning once again we had the so called cirrus mist
This evening in Sydney it has started once again-once again likely to prevent me from observing. I encourage you to investigate geo-engineering further before you so lightly dismiss the claims that our skies are being polluted
Proven techniques of weather modification are openly discussed at universities on how this is achieved- these are not conspiracy theories but facts
The top Universities in the world are now developing geoengineering programs to supposedly combat climate change. Oxford University in the UK is one of these universities: http://www.geoengineering.ox.ac.uk (http://www.geoengineering.ox.ac.uk/), and one technique is the by:
releasing light-colored sulphur particles or other aerosols into the atmosphere to reflect the sun’s rays back into the atmosphere to reflect the sun’s rays back into space. This approach (2) (http://www.nicholas.duke.edu/dukenvironment/f09/assessing-the-pros-and-cons-of-geoengineering-to-fight-climate-change)
At the site:2013/04/29/geoengineering-chemtrails-what-in-the-world-are-they-spraying-and-why/
are two award winning documentaries that help shed light on chemical trails, what they are and why they’re sprayed in our skies every day. I recommend you watch them with an open mind. This is a small amount of a large array of evidence that supports the idea of chemical trails. It’s important to educate ourselves on these matters as it’s clear we are not going to get the truth from mainstream sources.

[barx1963]

If the reactions are what you expected, why bother posting? But anyway, how about we deal in a few facts.
Contrails have been around a long time, photos and movies from WWII often show them. Yes they are more common these days as there are lots more aeroplanes! When we were in the UK recently I pointed out to my beloved a whole mix of them in the sky, but that is a part of the world that has a lot of planes.
If here really is a conspiracy, wouldn't it make more sense to do the spraying in out of the way places away from prying eyes? But no we see all the "chemtrails" concentrated over urban areas. Furthermore, if the idea is to reflect sunlight to alleviate global warming, wouldn't it make sense to do it where there is lots of sunlight? But again the "chemtrails" mainly appear over those tropical paradises of Northern Europe and NE of the USA!
Presumably the allegation is that commercial jets are being used to do the spraying. If military planes were used the world's hoards of planespotters would very quickly notice a large increase in non commercial traffic. Surely then I should be able to visit an airport and be able to identify the nozzles used on the jets pretty easily. They would have to be pretty big to be able to distribute enough of the stuff to have any effect. There are lots of people who would be familiar with construction of modern planes who would be able to spot them. Any evidence that has happened?
Also to do this you would have to bring all the maintenance workers, engineers etc into the conspiracy, and we all know that the larger the number that have to keep a secret, the greater the odds that someone won't!
Further, why shouldn't major Universities discuss geoengineering. It is a legitimate area of study, to see if it worthwhile, cost effective etc. It is a big leap to go from "Oxford is openly discussing it" to "it is actually happening".

Anyway, that my 2 cents!

Cheers
Malcolm

[Silverskies]

Hi Brian,
You are right in your observations. In my city, Perth, we have never had contrails as we don't have the very high altitude flights pass over nor conducive atmospheric conditions. Since I became aware of the current global geoengineering programme I have been horrified to watch quite low altitude planes spraying across my city. They switch the spray on and off and I have photos and video footage. The 'chemtrails' do not evaporate as contrails do, rather spreading to form amorphous often pinkish coloured cover, often streaky in appearance or weblike or smokey. Against the sun you can see pink and green colours and the horizons are very white/ silver. Of course this is dimming the sunlight (and reducing nightime visibility) the days being noticeably dimmer. Also the harsh burning sensation on the skin is commented on by so many people now with the latest independent scientific testing using the best equipment showing UV levels off the charts. The US based website geoengineeringwatch.org is full of information; the patents for aerosols and weather modification, reports on airport (inc Perth) and plane modifications and costings, US gov't documents such as Weather As A Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather by 2025 plus soil and rainwater tests showing up with aluminium, barium etc. Interesting to note also the increase in Alzheimers and Respiratory diseases. Also Monsanto has developed aluminium resistant seeds and spent a fortune on climate research. Despite some brave politicians acknowledging this terrible crime, and increasing numbers of activists and legal actions to bring this to light, the mainstream media is under great pressure to either keep silent on this or try and dissuade people from investigating or taking this issue seriously by labelling it as a conspiracy theory. Interesting to look up the origins of that term too! Fortunately it is now starting to be reported on seriously in widely read publications All the best Brian and keep informing others of this crime against humanity.

[cjb]

Hi guys,

Could the intermittent trails, that people have noted, be planes dumping fuel prior to landing which I understand is quite common?

I could understand the US and China trying to mitigate climate change by these methods - their politicians seem somewhat concerned about climate change - but I'm not entirely sure that our current government shares these views (pretty sure that they wanted to get rid of a certain group called the Climate Change Commission :screwy:) so the idea of Mr Abbott and Co. spending millions on such a scheme would seem a tad far fetched:P

Cheers,

Chris

[ZeroID]

Planes ONLY dump fuel if they in a forced landing situation and they are trying to reduce the fire risk if they pancake or similar. Do you dump fuel from your car just prior to parking ? :question:
Airlines are trying to save fuel, not chuck it away. It costs way too much !!

[koputai]

Go and see a doctor, I have seen these types of delusional behaviour in colleagues before. Diagnosed insanity usually follows.

No, seriously, see a doctor.

Cheers,
Jason

[cjb]

Sorry Brent but not true. Planes have a maximum landing weight and if they have conserved fuel (ie. flying with a tail wind) or have to divert to a closer airport they need to dump the excess fuel to get down to the specified landing weight or they could damage their landing gear :thumbsup: The flight to Perth WA can often have a very strong tail wind resulting in up to a 1/2 hour early arrival hence the excess fuel :).

Hope this clears things up,

Cheers,

Chris

[FlashDrive]

Culprit ....:D ... over my house 2 days ago.

Flash.....:lol:

[peteradams]

About 14 years ago I was looking forward to taking the telescope out at night - the forecast looked really good. But in the late afternoon, my perfect sky got mucked up with loads of criss-crossing contrails and was absolutely useless by the time astronomical twilight set in.

I got online and did some research. One site explained that the problem contrails form when heat from a plane's exhaust interacts with cold upper atmosphere ice crystals. It vaporizes them, and creates long 'strips' of clouds that spread out and eventually blend together, causing the whole sky to become overcast. Makes perfect sense.

[pmrid]

The contrails over major air-route hubs in Europe these days are just amazing. In Prague recently and saw anything from 15 to 20 contrails criss-crossing all the time.
Peter

[Allan]

Chris, I am an airline pilot, and in 26 years I have never had to dump fuel, so it is extremely rare. Any strong tail winds are always known prior to takeoff so we always arrive at destination below max landing weight. Almost every diversion occurs because of a problem at the destination, so we usually land at an alternate with low fuel, so dumping is the last thing on our mind. The most common reason for dumping is a problem on takeoff that requires us to return to the departure airport. But even in aircraft like the A380 we can still land on the same runway we took of on at 170 ton above max landing weight if we have to.

Now, don't get me started on Chemtrails. The most ludicrous, idiotic conspiracy theory ever invented.

[speach]

Yep must be little green men spreading jihadist propaganda by mind altering drugs distributed by chemtrails. Or it could be just burnt avgas.

[barx1963]

Yes the contrails above most of Europe or the NE USA are amazing. Interestingly, when we were in Mildura a few weeks ago, there were contrails everywhere. But the almost always dispersed within a few minutes.

Malcolm

[N1]

What's so bloody ridiculous about the chemtrail conspiracy theory is that there is no need to conspire in the first place. If authorities decided chemtrails were the thing to do, they would just go ahead and do it, without any secrecy. The population as a whole would just do the same thing they do when it comes to industrial and recreational air pollution, climate change, warfare, unfair taxation or muppet politics on the world stage - absolutely nothing! Why chemtrails should stand out as something that could not be made public lest the people revolt and actually get off their saturated arses is an absolute mystery to me.

Edit: Someone like Merlin could probably tell you what the mist is made of just by analysing the Sun's spectrum as seen through the supposed chemtrails ;)

[Silverskies]

Official documents pertaining to geoengineering, weather modification, weather derivatives etc.
http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/documents-2/

Aircraft have been able to fly without a pilot for a long time therefore it is unnecessary to have pilots involved. For more info on the droning of aircraft, google Abeldanger and uninterruptible autopilot.

[MrB]

Not quite. The water is a product of the combustion of the fuel itself. Apparently for every kg of Jet A-1 fuel burned, 3.15kg of CO2 and 1.26kg of H2O are produced as exhaust gas (equivalent to 1.26 litres of liquid water)

Edit: I'm now waiting for the inevitable question about how 3.15kg of CO2 and 1.26kg of H2O can come from just 1kg of fuel burned ;)

[brunono2]

Please look at the type of evidence provided to the United Nations in 2007 by Dr Rosiland Peterson (A scientist concerned about the effect of chemicals pumped into the atmosphere as part of Geoengineering efforts on agriculture) showing that geoengineering is taking place. If you look at the man produced chemical clouds which she shows on the presentation to the United Nations you will recognise many of the wispy so called clouds in our atmosphere.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-eKH6U3RNqI

This is an official UN video- people who will bother to investigate for themselves rather than simply dismiss the as a conspiracy theory and simply look at some of the crazy cloud formations will soon realise what is really going on

Bruno

[MrB]

Evidence?
In 2012 she openly stated she has no evidence:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOXt0BTOTN0
She states that after 10 years of research, she has "NO EVIDENCE"

Also, Dr.Peterson has never once uttered the word 'Chemtrail'.
In fact she is trying very hard to distance herself from the conspiracy theory 'community'

Also, the video you linked is always claimed to be of a UN address. But it is not.
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/debunked-rosalind-peterson-leaker-addressing-un-about-chemtrails-and-geoengineering.3514/

[Silverskies]

Also see http://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf?docId=US73564228
(US20120117003) Geoengineering Method Of Business Using Carbon Counterbalance Credits
“A business method for providing an emissions trading approach value to products and services that provide active cooling of the Earth that provides a sustainable means for global cooling strategies to achieve commercial value, in order to drive development and real-world application of these approaches, comprising the steps of manufacturing a light-scattering nanoparticle (527), deploying the stratospheric nanoparticles for reducing solar radiation incident on the Earth (537), receiving Carbon Counterbalance Credits in exchange for the local, national, regional, or international benefits derived from said deployment (547), and derives income from selling said credits in order to create a sustainable and viable business (557). Systems, devices, and agents for deployment in accordance with the business method are also disclosed.”

[clive milne]

Is there actually such a thing as a 'conspiracy theory community'
I'd be curious to know if that would include people that accept the official narrative of 911 for example? (being that it is also a conspiracy theory)

[MrB]

Sure, why not. We here on this forum are a community of amateur astronomers are we not?
There are a plethora of conspiracy fora out there, many of which have sub-fora/threads covering 911.

[cjb]

Wow, the skies must be rubbish over in Perth at the moment with all those Qantas plane having to turn back and dump fuel:eyepop: - sorry I forgot, planes don't ever dump fuel :rofl:

chris

[Allan]

You are absolutely correct Chris, none of those Qantas aircraft dumped fuel.

[cjb]

Oh Allan, you make me giggle ;) Has the naughty media been telling me lies again :rofl:

Merry Christmas to you and all the IIS group :thumbsup:

Chris

[Allan]

They certainly have, and they do it all the time. How do I know? As per my earlier post to you, I fly the A380 for Qantas.

[cjb]

Still giggling, Alan :rofl: Still at least all the chemtrail guys now know who to blame :lol: (I wish they did a smile icon for falling off your chair with laughter!)

Merry Christmas :thumbsup:
Chris

[rcheshire]

No. It's a conspiracy!

[Mokusatsu]

Chemtrails are real. You can fight conspiracy theorists by signing this petition:

https://www.communityrun.org/petitions/petition-to-the-global-nwo-government-to-increase-chemtrail-spraying

:lol:

[clive milne]

That is an interesting bag of conspiracy theories. I respectfully suggest that you might be in error in putting them all in the same basket of legitimacy.

My take on them is as follows:

Moon Landing conspiracy: bogus (I think)

Climate Denial: bogus

Haarp: Perhaps not what it is made out to be but there is evidence which is cause for concern....
The DOD has openly admitted that the purpose of HAARP was manipulation of the ionosphere (as distinct from research)
http://www.adn.com/article/20140514/air-force-prepares-dismantle-haarp-ahead-summer-shutdown?sp=/99/100/&ihp=1
It is also worth noting the contents of Resolution 31/72 of the United Nations General Assembly which specifically addresses the use of weather manipulation for strategic ends:
http://www.un-documents.net/a31r72.htm
Smoke without fire?

Obamas birth certificate: Most likely bogus... Interesting though that the PDF had something like 23 layers when a simple photocopy would suffice, so probably bait to discredit the gullible, a distraction or both.

9-11 troofers: (Ad-Hominen duly noted)
I contend that it is a mistake to actually label the call for truth with respect to this conspiracy, a conspiracy theory in itself. By that I mean; the official narrative is a conspiracy theory which is proven to be an inadequate explanation of the events of that day. The best piece of evidence for that is the fact that 9 of the alleged hijackers were alive to protest their innocence the day after 9-11. There is also the statements of the people involved in the 9-11 comission, for example, the co-chairs of the 9/11 Commission (Thomas Keane and Lee Hamilton) said that the CIA (and likely the White House) “obstructed our investigation” they also said that the 9/11 Commissioners knew that military officials misrepresented the facts to the Commission, and the Commission considered recommending criminal charges for such false statements.

9/11 Commissioner Timothy Roemer said “We were extremely frustrated with the false statements we were getting”

Former 9/11 Commissioner Max Cleland resigned from the Commission, stating: “It is a national scandal”; “This investigation is now compromised”; and “One of these days we will have to get the full story because the 9-11 issue is so important to America. But this White House wants to cover it up”

The Senior Counsel to the 9/11 Commission (John Farmer) who led the 9/11 staff’s inquiry, said “I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described …. The tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years…. This is not spin. This is not true.”

In light of this, I contend that (without pre-supposing who dunit) it is entirely reasonable to ask for an explanation that is consistent with the evidence at hand (starting with wtc7) and satisfies the requests for information of the original members of the 9-11 commission.

[LewisM]

Face it, the chemtrails both made the 9-11 pilots groggy and also weakened the structure of the towers. Them chemtrails is bad juju... :) :P :D

[clive milne]

:lol:

[LewisM]

I agree on the 9-11 "palm off" - lots of very poor official explanations and a lot that makes no sense at all. I fear we will need to wait for the declassification of these files, which I trully believe will be RECLASSIFIED when they are due to be released. I will be long since ash by then anyway, so it matters not.

CIA staging events to polarise the USA/World? No, never happen, no not the USA... impossible :P :D.

[Eden]

I am glad there are some sane voices in this thread.

Contrails are a common phenomenon, the increased frequency of which (as someone correctly pointed out) can be attributed to the steady rise in the amount air traffic over the years.

Do be not fooled into believing the bunk that is the "chemtrail" conspiracy.

Sure, some farmers have their crops sprayed with small aircraft, but if you seriously think that that Qantas flight from Melbourne to Adelaide is secretly dumping tonnes
of toxic chemicals on the unsuspecting community, then you should seriously consider psychiatric help.

Now, where did I put my tin-foil hat? :lol:

[clive milne]

You know, I accepted the official 9-11 story without question and scoffed at those who questioned it up until 2007 when I stumbled on the doco called 'in plane sight'. After watching it I was convinced that it was an inside job. I went from being not even peripherally interested, to being consumed by it. However, after numerous rigorous debates on the subject (on a different forum) and countless hours of digging and reading, I came to realise that 'in plane sight' is a master class example of mis-direction and is more or less bogus. I'm pretty sure the principle here is that it doesn't matter what facts you come up with if you are answering the wrong questions.
I have an opinion on who was responsible, but without going into it in detail I'll just say that I don't think it is correct (in essence) to label it as an inside job. (The USA is third last on the list of countries that actually benefitted - a point often overlooked)
To a certain extent, I also think that it is actually counter productive to speculate too much (it's a slippery slope) - it isn't necessary to elaborate a conspiracy theory to establish that the commonly accepted sequence of events isn't actually supported by facts or evidence, and it most certainly isn't consistent with our understanding of material science or even the most basic laws of physics.
The onus to substantiate the impossible is then transferred to those beholden to that particular conspiracy theory known as the official narrative. But on this forum at least, the discussion is unlikely to take place any time soon.