Debunked Claim: RH% too low for contrails

Balance

Senior Member.
Video shows;
Contrails in the sky above.
Weather data low 14RH% @10,000M
The uploader claims this proves he's not seeing contrails so concludes they're sprayed chemicals.


As we know, the oft used criteria for contrail formation persistence is a RH of ~65% so where's the disconnect here? I feel a layman's explanation would make an excellent exercise as this sort of "proof" is becoming more prevelant.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

cloudspotter

Senior Member.
Well he's 3 hours late for a start. 12z is 07:00 EST and he's filming at 10:00

Plus -50C is into the Always contrails area at 300 hPa
 

M Bornong

Senior Member.
This is a possible candidate for the plane he couldn't identify, from the quick view in the video, I don't think he zoomed out far enough.

RonHines2.jpg
 

skephu

Senior Member.
By the way, his statement that contrail formation requires 70% RH is wrong. There is no RH requirement for contrail formation. Only for contrail persistence.
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
This is a possible candidate for the plane he couldn't identify, from the quick view in the video, I don't think he zoomed out far enough.
is your time right? 15:07, the plane is about 9:45 based on his vid start at 9:42


add:
he's using "wx-now.com" for 'current weather'. I dont know what "wx-now" is since it covers the entire world, But CT news Friday night says Saturday was to be partly cloudy.
http://wxedge.com/2016/01/29/quiet-weekend-warm-start-to-february/


oops forgot my pic.. his 'current weather' is from an hour prior too according to his internet phone screen
mer.PNG
 
Last edited:

Dan Page

Senior Member.
Why would he not use Brookhaven NY (KOKX), which is closer, or Albany NY (KALB) which is more upwind, for upper level RH. And yes a lot can happen in 3 hours, especially if the jet stream is close by, I don't know how to access days old upper level maps, so can't show that. With regards to contrails always with temp below -50 and above 300 HPA, that is most definitely not true, I have seen and identified many flights over this area that were completely contrail-less and at altitudes up to 41,000. Very hard to spot them with no contrail, FR24 is a big help, but even then, it helps when the sun is glinting off the fuselage.
I am also seeing people posting the contrails and then beside it a map of the RH at 30,000 ft confirming (in their mind) that the RH is too low for contrail formation thus it must be a chemtrail.
With regards to the surface weather report that he shows in the video, they are pretty much all automated now and I believe the cloud detector only goes as high as 20,000 ft, if there is nothing between the ground and that limit, then it will say the sky is clear. Also there can be cloud below it's limit that does not go over the sensor during the hour, thus it will report a clear sky.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Nobody should ever use a a single radiosonde sounding to predict, justify, or falsify a contrail observation. They are highly inaccurate when measuring RH at low temperatures, and almost certainly not a good representation of the conditions at the contrail.

Even if the soundings seem accurate, and predict contrails, that's more luck than anything. If you go and use those soundings to show that the conditions are right for contrails, then that basically validates the argument that trails are forming in other, impossible, conditions.

So unless you know the balloon went though the trail, and it had a chilled mirror hygrometer, then using that data is at best pointless, and at worst highly counterproductive.
 
Last edited:

Henk001

Senior Member.
Nobody should ever use a a single radiosonde sounding to predict, justify, or falsify a contrail observation. They are highly inaccurate when measuring RH at low temperatures, and almost certainly not a good representation of the conditions at the contrail.

Even if the soundings seem accurate, and predict contrails, that's more luck than anything. If you go and use those soundings to show that the conditions are right for contrails, then that basically validates the argument that trails are forming in other, impossible, conditions.

So unless you know the balloon went though the trail, and it had a chilled mirror hygrometer, then using that data is at best pointless, and at worst highly counterproductive.
Is there a way to find out what kind of hygrometer is used for a particular sounding?
 

Dan Page

Senior Member.
Is there a way to find out what kind of hygrometer is used for a particular sounding?
There is a very good writeup on the two main types of hygrometers used worldwide, here:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2003GL016985/full
As Mick said, both have significant limitations in temps below -40, one being that it reads too dry, and two being that there is a time lag of 10 seconds at -20 to 80 seconds at -60, and that is for the better reference chilled mirror hygrometer. After reading through all the info, it was clear to me that RH measurements at temps below about -40 are not at all reliable and have a significant dry bias. Here are some excerpts:

It also occurred to me, what if many aircraft were equipped with sensors that automatically sent wx data to ground stns or satellite every 15 mins or so, they could be more accurate and reliable and would provide a much higher resolution picture of most of the airmass in which planes fly. The sensor equipment could be provided by the NWS, including the cost of the downlink/uplink. A worldwide system such as this would negate the need for the launching of 1000 radiosondes every 6-12 hours, and greatly improve the quality of data, including over the oceans, where radiosondes do not go. Perhaps we will see this in the future when the technology becomes cheap enough, including the satellites that would relay this data, maybe it could just be an addon to the already existing system that relays aircraft operating parameters to the airline companies on a regular basis.
 

cloudspotter

Senior Member.
It also occurred to me, what if many aircraft were equipped with sensors that automatically sent wx data to ground stns or satellite every 15 mins or so, they could be more accurate and reliable and would provide a much higher resolution picture of most of the airmass in which planes fly. The sensor equipment could be provided by the NWS, including the cost of the downlink/uplink. A worldwide system such as this would negate the need for the launching of 1000 radiosondes every 6-12 hours, and greatly improve the quality of data, including over the oceans, where radiosondes do not go. Perhaps we will see this in the future when the technology becomes cheap enough, including the satellites that would relay this data, maybe it could just be an addon to the already existing system that relays aircraft operating parameters to the airline companies on a regular basis.

What about just using water vapour imagery from satellites?
 

Henk001

Senior Member.
What about just using water vapour imagery from satellites?
Satellites measure the total column water vapour in the atmosphere. It is very difficult to derive from that the water vapour content for a given atmospheric layer.
from: http://www.remss.com/measurements/atmospheric-water-vapor
 

Trailblazer

Moderator
Staff member
It also occurred to me, what if many aircraft were equipped with sensors that automatically sent wx data to ground stns or satellite every 15 mins or so, they could be more accurate and reliable and would provide a much higher resolution picture of most of the airmass in which planes fly. The sensor equipment could be provided by the NWS, including the cost of the downlink/uplink. A worldwide system such as this would negate the need for the launching of 1000 radiosondes every 6-12 hours, and greatly improve the quality of data, including over the oceans, where radiosondes do not go. Perhaps we will see this in the future when the technology becomes cheap enough, including the satellites that would relay this data, maybe it could just be an addon to the already existing system that relays aircraft operating parameters to the airline companies on a regular basis.

Much of the weather data that goes into the forecasting models already comes from routine airline flights. Tens of thousands of such observations go into each six-hourly run of the NOAA's GFS model, for instance.

Only a small proportion of the aircraft supplying this data also provide water vapour measurements, but I believe this is changing. From a quick search:

http://ocwws.weather.gov/afp/resources/AircraftWxObs-Jan07RAM.ppt


Also see this 2014 Bloomberg article. It states that fewer than 1% of commercial aircraft have the humidity sensors. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...ecome-weathermen-as-sensors-upend-forecasting
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
As Mick said, both have significant limitations in temps below -40, one being that it reads too dry, and two being that there is a time lag of 10 seconds at -20 to 80 seconds at -60, and that is for the better reference chilled mirror hygrometer. After reading through all the info, it was clear to me that RH measurements at temps below about -40 are not at all reliable and have a significant dry bias.

It's not just that they have a dry bias, they also have a "No Response Level", which is an altitude above which they stop responding to changes in humidity and either return a fixed low value, or zero. Have a look at this graph of three types of RH meters with altitude. SW (red) is the accurate one. The other two have a dry bias and then stop working above 8,500m (~28,000 feet, just when you need them to be accurate).

 

Dan Page

Senior Member.
It's not just that they have a dry bias, they also have a "No Response Level", which is an altitude above which they stop responding to changes in humidity and either return a fixed low value, or zero. Have a look at this graph of three types of RH meters with altitude. SW (red) is the accurate one. The other two have a dry bias and then stop working above 8,500m (~28,000 feet, just when you need them to be accurate).

Yes, I did see that in the web site I posted, just neglected to mention it.
 

Ross Marsden

Senior Member.
The data has to be used with caution.
There is a known dry bias in the measured RH; the modest quality instrument is operating at the limit of its capability.
User needs to be aware that the data is times in UTC, not local time.
RH at a point is quite variable in time, and can vary markedly in the horizontal as well.

Modeled RH is a better indication, but that too has limitations.
 
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
Jesse3959 FE Claim Debunked: JTolan Epic Gravity Experiment - Flat earther disproves Perspective! (or his instruments.) Flat Earth 0
TEEJ Debunked: Claim of Iraq/Syria ISIS Convoy with US Helicopter Escort 2015 Conspiracy Theories 0
Belfrey Debunked: Claim that injury makeup shows Alison Parker and Adam Ward as "crisis actors." Conspiracy Theories 8
Mike Fl Debunked: The Claim That the Envelope Was Found in the Lanza Home Sandy Hook 10
derwoodii Debunked: Claim MH 17 wreckage engine fan is wrong size Flight MH17 2
AluminumTheory Debunked: Infowars' & Mancow's claim that Harry Lennix trained Obama Conspiracy Theories 136
Mick West Debunked: Pentagon has Evidence of "Off-World Vehicles Not Made on this Earth" UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 14
derrick06 Debunked: United Nations creates a "NWO" website Conspiracy Theories 2
N Debunked: Google Mail icon shows linkage to Freemasons Conspiracy Theories 4
Mendel Debunked: The WHO did not take the Taiwan CDC seriously Coronavirus COVID-19 0
A Why 9/11 Truthers Are Wrong About The Facts | (Part 1 w/ Mick West) 9/11 1
Mendel Debunked: Radar Waves Affect Clouds General Discussion 0
Pumpernickel Need Debunking: Foucault's Pendulum debunked through Mach's principle (the Earth is a static object in the center of the Universe) Science and Pseudoscience 16
M Ufos arrive to the central zone of Chile. (Debunked). Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 0
Jesse3959 FE Debunked with water tube level - 187 foot building 21.2 miles away below eye level Flat Earth 0
H Debunked: Cadillac Mountain from 220 miles Flat Earth 7
Mick West Debunked: DoD prepares for martial law in CONUS: Conspiracy Theories 0
Oystein Debunked: AE911T: CNBC Anchor Ron Insana claims Building 7 a Controlled Implosion 9/11 13
A Debunked: NASA tampered with the original television audio of the Apollo 11 moon landing Conspiracy Theories 1
Greylandra Debunked: media headline "Judea declares war on Germany" [boycott] Conspiracy Theories 20
Mick West Discovery Channel's "Contact: Declassified Breakthrough" was debunked 2.5 years ago UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 8
Joe Hill Debunked: "The North Face of Building 7 Was Pulled Inward" 9/11 66
A Debunked : Fake Set Moon Landing with TV Camera and Stairs Conspiracy Theories 3
Mick West Debunked: Photo with Sun Rays at Odd Angles Flat Earth 0
Staffan Debunked: Wikileaks releases unused footage of moon landing (Capricorn One movie scenes) Conspiracy Theories 2
Mick West Debunked: Neil deGrasse Tyson : "That Stuff is Flat" Flat Earth 10
Mendel Debunked: Air Map of the World 1945 is a flat Earth map Flat Earth 0
Trailblazer Debunked: Trees being cut down "because they block 5G" (tree replacement in Belgium) 5G and Other EMF Health Concerns 44
deirdre Debunked: Exemption from military service doc proves Jews had foreknowledge of WW2 (fake leaflet) General Discussion 0
Trailblazer Debunked: Obama called Michelle "Michael" in a speech. (Referring to Michael Mullen Jr) Quotes Debunked 0
Rory Debunked: 120-mile shot of San Jacinto proves flat earth Flat Earth 39
Rory Debunked: The Lunar Cycle affects birth rates Health and Quackery 26
Rory Debunked: Study shows link between menstrual cycle and the moon Health and Quackery 30
novatron Debunked: California Wildfires Match the Exactly Path of the Proposed Rail System Wildfires 3
Rory Debunked: "You must love yourself before you love another" - fake Buddha quote Quotes Debunked 7
W Debunked: Qanon claims there have been 51k sealed indictments filed this year. Current Events 11
K Debunked: Audio of David Rockefeller "leaked" speech in 1991 [Audio Simulation] General Discussion 2
tadaaa Debunked: Fake photos-Novichok attack Russian 'agents' (side by side gates) General Discussion 34
Mick West Debunked: XYO Device Replacing GPS, Saving $2 Million a Day General Discussion 23
Mick West Debunked: "Tip Top" as a QAnon Clue from Trump [He's said it before] Conspiracy Theories 3
Whitebeard Debunked: Nibiru FOUND? Mysterious gigantic rogue planet spotted lurking outside our solar system Science and Pseudoscience 1
Mick West Debunked: "There Exists a Shadowy Government" — Daniel Inouye Quotes Debunked 0
Mick West Debunked: Delta Lambda Compression General Discussion 16
MisterB Debunked: Isle of Man from Blackpool at water level proves flat earth [refraction] Flat Earth 19
JFDee Debunked: Wernher von Braun confirmed that rockets can't leave earth Conspiracy Theories 23
Mick West Debunked: Missing $21 Trillion / $6.5 Trillion / $2.3 Trillion - Journal Vouchers Conspiracy Theories 33
MikeG Debunked: Obamacare Article 54 (Satire FB Page) General Discussion 2
Mick West Debunked: "Deadly Ultraviolet UV-C and UV-B Penetration to Earth’s Surface:" [Stray Light] Contrails and Chemtrails 32
Astro Debunked: Apollo Lunar Module Hatch Too Small for Spacesuit Science and Pseudoscience 0
Mick West Debunked: NIST's Lack of Explanation for WTC7 Freefall [They Have One - Column Buckling] 9/11 38
Related Articles


















































Related Articles

Top