Debunked: Iain Carstairs' Chemtrail Conspiracy Theories

[David Fraser]

I'm in Bedford, UK. There is no direct weather balloon data for Bedford but Nottingham, UK, is quite close, and representative. There are other samples to the south so a good idea can be had. But when the day is so hot people are hiding in the shade and wandering around topless, it's also pretty convincing evidence!

But there is no data from Nottingham for conditions during the day only at midnight.

 

[solrey]

I'm in Bedford, UK. There is no direct weather balloon data for Bedford but Nottingham, UK, is quite close, and representative. There are other samples to the south so a good idea can be had. But when the day is so hot people are hiding in the shade and wandering around topless, it's also pretty convincing evidence!

Conditions at the surface are NOT evidence of what atmospheric conditions are at 10,000 meters. It's not uncommon during the summer to have a low pressure trough with entrained moisture riding over the top of a high pressure ridge at the surface. Those conditions can produce persistent contrails and/or a haze of cirrus even in the middle of summer. Does the phrase "The hazy days of summer" ring a bell?

 

[Mick West]

If you'd like to check weather balloon data, you can explain to me why, on the hottest day of the year (up to that date) August 16th 2012, the following mess was observed at around 1:00 pm, the hottest part of the day itself, directly over London; over Covent Garden in fact. Now, I lived in London from Oct 1978 until Dec 1992 and I never once saw anything like this, winter, summer, autumn spring. If even a single plane had left marks like this, people would have been very alarmed.

At around 9000m the temp was -42 and pressure 314, with 37% relative humidity. The appleman chart says contrails are not likely under those conditions, but we watched as these things drenched the sky in short order. If you like your skies this way, then you're quite right to shout down anyone who complains. But if, like hundreds of thousands of sane people, you like a blue sky every now and again, you're going to be saying - WTF?!

Actually if the RH was being measured at 37% it was likely quite a bit higher due to radiosonde dry bias.

The formation of natural cirrus clouds indicates an RH of above 100%. Try looking up the RH on days when you see natural cirrus. You will see similar values, as the radiosonde basically is not working.

But even if it were, the humidity in one place is not a good indication of the humidity in another. Weather in the UK comes in bands as weather systems arrive, and can change radically in a matter of minutes - certainly in hours. The visible weather, and the weather from a sounding, is just a local snapshot. Look at the bigger picture on that day:

August 16th 2012
http://earthdata.nasa.gov/labs/worl...nd&time=2012-08-16T12:00:00&switch=geographic


A closer examination shows the high cirrus ice clouds, proving that conditions were suitable in places for contrails to form:

 

[Mick West]

I have attached a photo of a Boeing E3 AWACS aircraft which circled over the Vale of Pickering for a considerable period of time on 09/01/2013. Something is being sprayed from the wingtips which leaves persistent trails whereas no trails are being left by any of the four engines. I have witnessed similar events on two separate occasions, one lasted for approximately four hours. I wrote to the Defence Secretary and the Ministry of Defence over a month ago asking for an explanation but so far have not received any replies.

Looks like fuel dumping. See this post from a US AWACS pilot:

http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/711037/

We dump fuel quite often on the AWACS (E-3), coming back to Tinker we dump over lake Draper in southern Oklahoma. We joke about not fishing in the lake

I've also dumped over the atlantic several times, usually we clear through ATC when we are dumping and dump at around 25,oooft so it evaporates before hitting the ground. ONce with one engine out we dumped at 22,ooo but the fuel still evaporates at that level.Ciao.

Hook 'em Horns,
Tony aka Lt-AWACS

Content from External Source

This photo shows two aircraft passing at similar altitudes taken on 02/03/2013 in North Yorkshire. Granted there is a slight difference in height between the two planes but I doubt that it is enough for one to be leaving a long persistent trail and the other not to leave a trail at all. It is also a matter of concern to me that aircraft are passing at such close quarters.

Those planes actually look to be 10,000 feet apart, seing as the lower plane is smaler than the upper plane, but looks nearly twice as large.

But even if it were just 1,000 feet that is a normal and legal separation. If planes are separated by 1000 feet vertical, there is no restriction on horizontal separation, they can be right on top of each other. Also it's plenty of distance for conditions to vary between contrail formation or not. See the full explanation here:

http://contrailscience.com/why-do-some-planes-leave-long-trails-but-others-dont/

 

[Mick West]

Iain, can you comment on this please:



Here's a direct link to the 17th, zoom out for more perspective:
http://earthdata.nasa.gov/labs/worl...nd&time=2012-09-17T12:00:00&switch=geographic

 

[iain carstairs]

Iain, I'm a little confused. Are you in Bedford, UK or Nottingham, UK?

I may have missed something in the initial posts, as I'm reading on my phone.

Hi,

I'm in Bedford. I took the accompanying photos last October from my street. So whether something is overhead or not - well, you can be the judge!

In this street the houses were built in 1880, and are fairly tall relative to the space in between them. So the area visible is really more or less directly overhead. There is no possibility that we mistook a flight overhead for one 60 miles to the south.

Nobody minds if the RAF or NATO want to conduct harmless exercises. I used to live near Chicksands RAF and sometimes we'd get fighter jets (around 2001) on orange alert making a colossal sound as they roared overhead. It was really something. I'm a big fan of aircraft, and have been ever since I was very young. So I'm not a Luddite hoping to return to the horse and cart. I probably have made 200 flights in my time; in the days when passports were stamped on entry to a foreign country, I filled up an entire passport.

I flew after 9/11, I flew in to Chicago into a state of paranoia. The airport may as well have been on lockdown. It was frightening the any anyone with an Arabic complexion was screamed at. I even flew a light airplane over Ireland, and considered getting a licence. This phenomenon of chemtrails is not the lunatic fringe, although of course there are unhinged people in all walks of life who want to cause trouble or who have alarming theories. This is something happening whose scale is without precedent.

Many people like me are only trying to figure it out. I wish people with the brains to analyse meteorological data and the sketpical approach so neccessary in a media-nonsense world, people such as yourselves, would lend your weight to getting to the bottom of it.

If we as a country were to be sprayed by an enemy state, and the government did nothing, you would naturally expect people to try to defend themselves in any way possible, and find who was responsible for the spraying and for the lethargy in Whitehall that allowed it to happen. I do not understand why people with a healthy sense of self preservation are supposed to act differently than this just because it seems NATO is involved. This might be the biggest story of the 21st century, and have the worst impact of any of the insane acts committed by military-based economies. And as Christopher Hitchens would have said, "..and it's competing in a very strong field."

 

[iain carstairs]

Iain, can you comment on this please:



Here's a direct link to the 17th, zoom out for more perspective:
http://earthdata.nasa.gov/labs/worl...nd&time=2012-09-17T12:00:00&switch=geographic

yes, I can comment. I had planefinder open, and noted that none of the planes flying overhead were on ADS-B positioning systems. The CAA aircraft which DID fly overhead were invisible - because they did not leave any trails. To me that's a prima facie case.

And you'll notice chemtrails look the same at all times of the year, at all seasons, at all times of the day, at the height of summer and the depths of winter. My colleague has noted them over Royston at night, as distinct trails which proved hard to photograph but nevertheless show up under moonlight to the eye.

It is NOT POSSIBLE for condensation to behave in a uniform manner in all these different scenarios. It can't be, because the air - whatever its condition - is more sturdy than the condensation. The only way for a uniform behaviour to appear is if the chemicals have a stronger, more cohesive quality than the air itself. You have to use your eyes and common sense for this. The white muck I photographed all came from planes - they are unrelated to the NASA photos. In any case, in the right hand photo I am roughly above the "27" mark and in a clear patch of air. The muck turds I photographed all came from planes. I saw it with my own eyes. And as you can see from my photos, without the spray day planes, the sky would have been clear blue.

 

[Mick West]

I mean can you comment about the weather aloft being different, as indicated by there being a lot of high cirrus on the 17th, and very little on the 18th.

 

[iain carstairs]

And if you look up close at the NASA photo, you'll see that all the wispy trail clouds are clearly jet streams. there are dozens more over the south east coast but this photo is helpful to try and figure out where the planes come from and where they start spraying. I'll have to dig into this now. What an insane amount of trouble to go to, just because people have lost contact with their own common sense.

These are the closest readings I could get for weather balloon data for the two days. A temp of -36 wouldn't form contrails. And the rel humidity is actually more likely for trails on the 18th, which was totally clear the whole day!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
PRES..HGHT..TEMP..DWPT..RELH ...........MIXR DRCT SKNT THTA THTE THTV
hPa.... m.....C......C ..........% ............g/kg deg knot K K K
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
330.0 8726 -36.3 -48.8 26............ 0.14 265 55 325.1 325.7 325.1 17 sep
338.0 8497 -33.9 -42.9 40............ 0.26 269 83 326.2 327.2 326.2 18 sep

Two questions remain: WHY do white-turd laying craft NOT SHOW UP ON CIVILIAN GPS?
And........................: WHY do CAA craft (ADS-B) NEVER leave long muck turds in the sky?

 

[Mick West]

And if you look up close at the NASA photo, you'll see that all the wispy trail clouds are clearly jet streams. there are dozens more over the south east coast but this photo is helpful to try and figure out where the planes come from and where they start spraying. I'll have to dig into this now. What an insane amount of trouble to go to, just because people have lost contact with their own common sense.

These are the closest readings I could get for weather balloon data for the two days. A temp of -36 wouldn't form contrails. And the rel humidity is actually more likely for trails on the 18th, which was totally clear the whole day!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
PRES..HGHT..TEMP..DWPT..RELH ...........MIXR DRCT SKNT THTA THTE THTV
hPa.... m.....C......C ..........% ............g/kg deg knot K K K
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
330.0 8726 -36.3 -48.8 26............ 0.14 265 55 325.1 325.7 325.1 17 sep
338.0 8497 -33.9 -42.9 40............ 0.26 269 83 326.2 327.2 326.2 18 sep

Two questions remain: WHY do white-turd laying craft NOT SHOW UP ON CIVILIAN GPS?
And........................: WHY do CAA craft (ADS-B) NEVER leave long muck turds in the sky?

Iain, can you first address the fact that the weather aloft was very different on those two days, and hence the caption on your image is wrong, and then we can move on to other things.

 

[iain carstairs]

Iain, can you first address the fact that the weather aloft was very different on those two days, and hence the caption on your image is wrong, and then we can move on to other things.

The caption on my image wasn't wrong - I was outside both days, and can tell you the skies were identical to start with, over my house. I should know - the photos show clear blue skies! I looked up! Identical! And then you see the weather balloon data which shows contrails were MORE likely to form on the crystal clear blue day! But they didn't. And why? Because in the cloudy picture, you are not looking at clouds. You are not looking at cirrus. You are not looking at wispy clouds. I am telling you, all that crap came off the back of a non-CAA jet. Out it came. First as a tight line, then as a dissipating swirl.

The question is never answered: why do white-muck-spreaders never show up on civilian GPS? It's like talking to a brick wall. The plan must be to try and exhaust people by making them dance around in circles - like a big call centre when you want to make a complaint. Wear 'em out. Wear 'em down.

Except you forget that all this arguing makes more of an impact on the web and on other people looking for support.

Here's a challenge: pick any country in NATO and, for example, search YouTube or the web for, say, "germany chemtrails". See if you can find one single NATO country which does not report this same problem. All these countries have different personalities and priorities. But I will challenge you to find a single country with no chemtrails reported.

 

[Jay Reynolds]

Iain Carstairs,

I originally assumed that your advocation of purchasing a surface-to-air missile and shooting down an aircraft flying peacefully over the UK might have happened during a period of inebriation or brief mental instability. I gave you the benefit of that doubt because from what I see you appear meek and mild mannered, but upon your appearance here I see that you have no regret for making those statements which appear to be a clear indication that you are seriously seeking to join others in taking the violent actions you describe.

For the above reasons, a few moments ago I reported you and the others who re-tweeted your call to the UK Home Office for Counter Terrorism.

The report may be accessed at the following link:
https://reporting.direct.gov.uk/status.php?ref_id=7ALg2503KDaX#

I did refer them to this particular thread, so at this point you are able to speak directly to MI5 about your situation in any future postings.

 

[JFDee]

Iain,

regarding the ADS-B equipment: there is quite a number of aircraft types that are usually not equipped with an ADS-B transponder.

See a list here:
http://www.flightradar24.com/how-it-works

 

[Belfrey]

The question is never answered: why do white-muck-spreaders never show up on civilian GPS? It's like talking to a brick wall. The plan must be to try and exhaust people by making them dance around in circles - like a big call centre when you want to make a complaint. Wear 'em out. Wear 'em down.

The answer is that they often do. Other people (including chemtrails believers) have had no trouble identifying commercial planes leaving trails on planefinder, flightradar24, etc. I'm not sure why you're having so much trouble with it.

Mick is trying to get you to focus on one topic at a time, because otherwise frequently no single topic gets adequately addressed (it's the "Gish Gallop" effect).

 

[Mick West]

The caption on my image wasn't wrong - I was outside both days, and can tell you the skies were identical to start with, over my house. I should know - the photos show clear blue skies! I looked up! Identical! And then you see the weather balloon data which shows contrails were MORE likely to form on the crystal clear blue day! But they didn't. And why? Because in the cloudy picture, you are not looking at clouds. You are not looking at cirrus. You are not looking at wispy clouds. I am telling you, all that crap came off the back of a non-CAA jet. Out it came. First as a tight line, then as a dissipating swirl.

Sure it LOOKED the same where you were, but that's just one little spot. The satellite photos show that it was very different. There was a huge band of cirrus cloud just to the north of you, moving south. You've got to look at the big picture:

The question is never answered: why do white-muck-spreaders never show up on civilian GPS? It's like talking to a brick wall. The plan must be to try and exhaust people by making them dance around in circles - like a big call centre when you want to make a complaint. Wear 'em out. Wear 'em down.

Except you forget that all this arguing makes more of an impact on the web and on other people looking for support.

They do show up on "civilian GPS" (ADS-B). Lots of people have identified these planes. I do it all the time. You are just doing it wrong, probably because you underestimate the distances involved. Exactly how many planes have you seen leaving persistent trails that you have failed to identify?

If what you say is true, then it should be VERY EASY to prove. So why not? Why not prove your case?

Here's a challenge: pick any country in NATO and, for example, search YouTube or the web for, say, "germany chemtrails". See if you can find one single NATO country which does not report this same problem. All these countries have different personalities and priorities. But I will challenge you to find a single country with no chemtrails reported.

Why would there be one? All the NATO countries have planes flying over them.

Why not look at China and Australia. They have contrails just the same (relative to the the overflight density)

 

[JFDee]

Iain,

annother thing to take into account is wind drift. Once a persistant and wide-spread trail is overhead of you, it is "old" and may already have moved side-ward quite a bit. The plane that created the trail may well have gone by somewhere distinctly not overhead.

 

[Mick West]

Hi,

I'm in Bedford. I took the accompanying photos last October from my street. So whether something is overhead or not - well, you can be the judge!

In this street the houses were built in 1880, and are fairly tall relative to the space in between them. So the area visible is really more or less directly overhead. There is no possibility that we mistook a flight overhead for one 60 miles to the south.

Again though the upper air weather was very different on those two days, and the conditions visible on satellite match




The 9:00 AM plane, do you have a wider shot of that, so its position can be better determined? Do you have some other photos showing planes you were unable to identify?

 

[HappyMonday]

I'm in Bedford, UK. There is no direct weather balloon data for Bedford but Nottingham, UK, is quite close, and representative.

Bedford and Nottingham are 92 miles apart by road, not sure how far as the crow flies.

There is no way you can claim any data from Nottingham is representative.

 

[HappyMonday]

For anyone that has doubts about whether geoengineering is taking place on a massive scale now the best course of action is to watch the skies over a period of time, preferably with binoculars and to study the flight paths of commercial airlines using a website like http://www.flightradar24.com/. There is no need to listen to people who profess to be experts because the difference between a normal condensation trail from a known flight like this and chemtrails like this will soon become apparent.

When this user isn't eulogising here, he's pro-chemtrails twitter troll @ftwild2013. Iain and he have been corresponding recently about the 'close minded' nature of metabunk users.

I wonder if a new thread for his post would be a good idea?

 

[iain carstairs]

I sense I'm wasting my time anyway. Every point is met with some obfuscating. Not one of you has stood out in the open and watched, mouth agape, as non-CAA craft peave filthy white muck in long banners, back and forth, over your homes.

It would be much more honest if you people said, "we don't believe in chemtrails. no matter the evidence, no matter the millions of complaints on the web, the tens of thousands of films and photos, we don't WANT to believe. no matter what you tell us - even if you get an ex USAF employee like Kirsten Meghan to admit she signed the MDHS for toxic metals which ended up being sprayed by KC30s - we will not believe."

People can respect that. But when someone who won't even give their real name tells me that clearly white chemical muck ejected somehow from planes I've seen with my own eyes is condensation.. aw, c'mon. I've been working closely with commercial aviation outfits since 1983 and I just can't take you guys seriously.

 

[HappyMonday]

Hardly any of the aircraft that I see leaving long trails that gradually spread out to form thin cloud appear on this website. This indicates to me that these aircraft are being operated by the military. As in this photo they often fly in close formation which I believe would be illegal for commercial airlines. I think the required separation distances are 1000ft vertical and three miles horizontal to avoid backwash from the engines.

Fuchs - Please confirm whether you believe any commercial, non-military aircraft are involved in the 'spraying' you and Iain are referring to, or not. A straight 'yes' or 'no' should suffice.

 

[HappyMonday]

I've been working closely with commercial aviation outfits since 1983 and I just can't take you guys seriously.

Arguing from authority doesn't really cut it here. Perhaps you can flesh out your credentials a bit for us?

In what capacity did you work with commercial aviation, and which 'outfits' were you involved with?

 

[SR1419]

It would be much more honest if you people said, "we don't believe in chemtrails. no matter the evidence, no matter the millions of complaints on the web, the tens of thousands of films and photos, we don't WANT to believe. no matter what you tell us - even if you get an ex USAF employee like Kirsten Meghan to admit she signed the MDHS for toxic metals which ended up being sprayed by KC30s - we will not believe."

I would believe if there were evidence.

Alas, seeing a persistent, spreading contrail is NOT evidence. This is a well known, long understood phenomenon of air travel- regardless of the plane of origin.

So, looking up "mouth agape" at what have been observed since planes have flown high enough and are easily explained by the phyiscs of the atmosphere cannot be construed as "evidence" for something else.

 

[SR1419]

Ian- how are the pictures you posted any different than these pictures dating back decades? :

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/487-Pre-1995-Persistent-Contrail-Archive

 

[Mick West]

I sense I'm wasting my time anyway. Every point is met with some obfuscating. Not one of you has stood out in the open and watched, mouth agape, as non-CAA craft peave filthy white muck in long banners, back and forth, over your homes.

It would be much more honest if you people said, "we don't believe in chemtrails. no matter the evidence, no matter the millions of complaints on the web, the tens of thousands of films and photos, we don't WANT to believe. no matter what you tell us - even if you get an ex USAF employee like Kirsten Meghan to admit she signed the MDHS for toxic metals which ended up being sprayed by KC30s - we will not believe."

People can respect that. But when someone who won't even give their real name tells me that clearly white chemical muck ejected somehow from planes I've seen with my own eyes is condensation.. aw, c'mon. I've been working closely with commercial aviation outfits since 1983 and I just can't take you guys seriously.

Sorry if you think there is obfuscation, I'm attempting clarity. In particular I'd like to figure out why you can't find persistent contrail planes when other people seem to be able to do it just fine.

Let's take this image:



The 9:00 AM on Oct 9th 2012. How did you eliminate flight TOM513 which was passing near overhead at the time? At about 4 miles away at the closest point (over Wootton, at 9:03), and 7.2 miles up, that would be an angle of 60 degrees (or 30 degrees from vertical). Most people refer to that as "overhead".



http://planefinder.net/flight/TOM513/time/2012-10-09T16:00:00 UTC

 

[Mick West]

Putting that path into Google Earth at 38,000 feet, this is what it looks like from Gladstone St, Bedford, UK.



The above image was created by overlaying the Street View, with the Ground-Level view, compare this with the other images where buildings are in shot.

If you had a wider shot of the 9:00AM photo, it would help settle the matter

 

[Mick West]

Also, could you clarify the date and time of that 9:00 photo? In the montage you have it as Oct 9, but on your site you have it as Oct 11th. Which is it?

Could you post the original image with the EXIF data?

 

[Pete Tar]

...

Great photography!

 

[hemi]

Putting that path into Google Earth at 38,000 feet, this is what it looks like from Gladstone St, Bedford, UK.



The above image was created by overlaying the Street View, with the Ground-Level view, compare this with the other images where buildings are in shot.

If you had a wider shot of the 9:00AM photo, it would help settle the matter

Could just about be a Chimtrail...

http://thecrowinstability.blogspot.co.nz/2011/12/31st-december-2011-chimtrails.html

 

[MikeC]

It would be much more honest if you people said, "we don't believe in chemtrails. no matter the evidence, no matter the millions of complaints on the web, the tens of thousands of films and photos, we don't WANT to believe. no matter what you tell us - even if you get an ex USAF employee like Kirsten Meghan to admit she signed the MDHS for toxic metals which ended up being sprayed by KC30s - we will not believe."

Kirsten did not say any such thing though - so why do you say she did??

I've been working closely with commercial aviation outfits since 1983 and I just can't take you guys seriously.

In what manner have you been "working closely with" aviation, exactly??

I have been "working closely with commercial aviation outfits" myself too - since 1976 when I started work as an aircraft engineering apprentice with New Zealand National Airways Corporation, popularly known then as NAC. I worked on boeing 737-200's that were the first civilian passenger jets used on domestic air routes here. I remember when they arrived - in 1968 - because suddenly we had long white trails spanning from horizon to horizon overhead in summer months - I can recall watching them from New Brighton beach in Christchurch as the aircraft flew from Wellington to Dunedin and return - often teh first trail would stil lbe here when the return flight was made, which would have to have been over an hour later.

So I spent 7 years working for NAC and then Air New Zealand when the 2 airlines were merged in 1978. During that time I actually worked on fuel system components - fuel pumps, the nozzles the fuel sprays from in the combustion chamber, and even water-methanol injection units that were used in some of NAC's F27 Friendships - so I had a prety good grounding in some of the important components kerosene and combustion related!

After that I worked for another airline, for a 3rd party maintenance company, and for a national aviation regulator. I have been a tradesman mechanic on base maintenance (when a/c stay in het hanger for anything from a week to 3 months), line maintenance (overnight and "on the ramp" maintenance), a safety analyst (looking at trends and items of particular concern for patterns), a maintenance planner (running the planned and unplanned maintenance of a small airline from manufacturers instructions - including creating the work documents out to airframe life of 36,000 flights in some cases), and quality assurance auditor looking into anythign and everything maintenance related to ensure it follows the ruels and procedures - from the greases used to quizing CEO's to ensure they provide adequate resources for maintenance - for those organisations.

and I have never seen anything in all those years that supports or even allows for the existence of "chemtails" or anything like them.

so now you might understand why I do not take your claim of "working closely with commercial aviation outfits" as being of any importance whatsoever - it could apply equally to travelling on business or being a baggage loader as much as any actual technical role!

 

[Mick West]

Could just about be a Chimtrail...

http://thecrowinstability.blogspot.co.nz/2011/12/31st-december-2011-chimtrails.html

Indeed, and on a serious note things like the chimney can be used as reference points to calculate the distance of the contrail, if you can calculate the height of the chimney, and the distance to it from the camera.

You can find the distance to the chimney using Google Earth

But you can also do things like overlay the image in Google Earth with a 5-mile grid at 36,000 feet as a visual aid:



Even looking up over building across the street is nothing at all like "straight up", but can be 10-15 miles away.

 

[Pete Tar]

I sense I'm wasting my time anyway. Every point is met with some obfuscating. ...

Can you give an example of this 'obfuscation'? Mick was very carefully providing information and analysis related to your specific photo and date - is this not exactly addressing your claim?
Understanding all the factors involved is not obfuscation unless they can be shown to be irrelevant. Your use of the word here seems dishonest - unless you meant something else.

 

[JRBids]

Perfectly normal reaction when people feel they are being attacked, I think. I've felt the same, and hundreds of others likewise. You think condensation can do achieve this? Check this out and see if you would feel angry, trying to get some blue sky on a day off that week. The planes were directly overhead, as you can see. Temperature was a non contrail day - check weather balloon data yourself. These were some of the last of the good weather of the whole year.

It's been cloudy here nearly every day this month. Kind of wet too, some days. Should I just chalk it up to, I don't know -- THE WEATHER -- or go get myself a missile?

THEY'RE CONTRAILS, IAIN! If you don't like the contrails, fine, complain about it. But don't waste your time and raise your blood pressure imagining they're deliberately spraying you with population reducing/rain inducing/flu causing phoney chemtrails.

 

[JRBids]

The answer is that they often do. Other people (including chemtrails believers) have had no trouble identifying commercial planes leaving trails on planefinder, flightradar24, etc. I'm not sure why you're having so much trouble with it.

Exactly, which is why chemtrail believers frequently claim commercial airlines are spraying chemicals, and it is particularly DISTURBING when they talk about shooting them down with missiles.

 

[Jay Reynolds]

My name is Iain Carstairs. My point is very simple, and to date, none of the shills on twitter or FB or anywhere else have been able to answer it, so it cannot be debunked until it has been addressed.

Get a copy of planefinder - it's a couple of dollars, no more, and run it on your iphone. or run it on your PC for free. When you see a plane spraying overhead you loko at planefinder. Here in Bedford there is very little overhead traffic - but what planes can be found on ADS-B radar systems do not leave any contrails, or if they do, they are very small and disappear very quickly.

However. When you see a jet piling out a huge load of white muck - which is very annoying to see - you cannot find this plane on planefinder. It simply isn't there. This means the plane is non ADS-B which means military.

Now I'm not saying what they are and are not spraying. I'm saying, these are not CAA planes. My contact at the CAA, Mark Simmons (my company runs a database of commercial flights and the CAA know us well) assures me no civil aircraft have been retrofitted for any kind of sprays. And my observations confirm that. He hinted that the only ones possibly responsible would be the MoD. Now since the spray planes don't appear on ADS-B and are flying in the same air (and at a lower altitude by the looks of them) and are using the same engines and fuel, they should all be leaving the same contrails or none at all.

Nobody in the debunk business seems interested in asking or answering these questions. If people would rather deny something that is clearly happening, then that is their problem. But after having refused to ask or answer these questions, they have no right to set themselves up as debunkers. They are just people who can't be bothered.

Iain,
My name is Jay Reynolds. I am currently working as a US Coast Guard Merchant Mariner as a ship's Chief Engineer. My background includes working for the General Electric compay as a Gas Turbine Field Engineer and later work with industrial gas turbine engines. I previously posted my observations of your claims and some possible reasons for your above conclusions which I find to be in error.

I will attempt to address your claims above. The most likely reasons for your inability to identify planes using planefinder are:
1. Not all planes have ADS-B transceivers on board.

I quote from the planefinder website FAQ:

Question: Why can’t I see every plane?

Answer: By way of explanation we pick up ADS-B data transmitted by aircraft and received by ground base stations.
Aircraft must be equipped with suitable transmission equipment for them to be detected by our receivers. Currently not all aircraft are equipped – Europe is currently well ahead of the US.
Across the world countries are making ADS-B mandatory for most aircraft over the coming years so this will get better and better too.
http://planefinder.net/about/faqs/

Iain, if planes do not have ADS-B onboard, they are invisible to the planefinder app, with some exceptions.

2. Some flights which are shown on planefinder are not shown in real time.

Again, I quote from the planefinder FAQ:

Question: Why are some planes orange?
Answer: The orange planes show a near real time display of every commercial scheduled flight in North America. Many general aviation aircraft are also shown.

You can turn this option on or off via the Map Options > Show Scheduled Flights checkbox.

This data is received differently to the rest of the planefinder.net data so we show the aircraft in a slightly different colour.
The orange plane tracking is also not quite as accurate as it does not use our own live virtual radar receiver data network, it also doesn’t have the playback facility.

Iain, the planes this answer speaks of are most likely estimated positions because they either do not carry ADS-B.

3. You are unfamiliar with the distance away a plane at 30-40,000 feet actually is.

I noted before that you are limiting your field of view to 15 miles, and Mick has already shown some very vivid examples of how you can better ascertain these distances.

I hope these answer your questions. I note that you previously said you had contacted Mr. Daniels who told you that all planes in the UK would show up on planefinder in real-time. Either he lied or you misunderstood, because the planefinder website makes it clear that not all planes are on there.

Isn't it interesting that such a simple error could induce you into thinking you are being "attacked"?

 

[iain carstairs]

It's been cloudy here nearly every day this month. Kind of wet too, some days. Should I just chalk it up to, I don't know -- THE WEATHER -- or go get myself a missile?

THEY'RE CONTRAILS, IAIN! If you don't like the contrails, fine, complain about it. But don't waste your time and raise your blood pressure imagining they're deliberately spraying you with population reducing/rain inducing/flu causing phoney chemtrails.

Yes.. I start to see the problem. If you can't tell the difference between clouds and condensation and persistent sprays, maybe you shouldn't really be posing as a scientific type! Next you'll be telling me WTC7 fell down because of a strong breeze!

 

[Pete Tar]

What's your criteria for differentiating between, a cloud, a condensation trail, and a 'persistent spray'?

... Next you'll be telling me WTC7 fell down because of a strong breeze!

Why would he tell you that?

 

[iain carstairs]

What's your criteria for differentiating between, a cloud, a condensation trail, and a 'persistent spray'?



Why would he tell you that?

Um.. which question to answer first. Well, my criteria is much the same as everyone else's: a lifetime of observation! As for 9/11, what we have found is the shills who love chemtrails are the same people who think WTC7 collapsed without the help of high explosives. They're also the same shills who promote Israel, and probably GM foods as well.

Defending the government is kind of like a package deal - if you buy one bit, you have to buy the lot - otherwise you'd be in a difficult situation. You'd be admitting one item is a lie, but claim everything else, from the same mouth is, for sure, as shiny and true as can be!

 

[Pete Tar]

Do you advocate the shooting down of planes you think are spraying or defend others who do?

Who's defending the government?

 

[Jazzy]

a lifetime of observation!

That doesn't answer the question.

HOW do you differentiate between, a cloud, a condensation trail, and a 'persistent spray'?

As for 9/11, what we have found is the shills who love chemtrails are the same people who think WTC7 collapsed without the help of high explosives. They're also the same shills who promote Israel, and probably GM foods as well.

What is a 'shill'? What proof do you have these people are shills?

Defending the government is kind of like a package deal - if you buy one bit, you have to buy the lot - otherwise you'd be in a difficult situation. You'd be admitting one item is a lie, but claim everything else, from the same mouth is, for sure, as shiny and true as can be!

Defending your baseless position is kind of like a package deal - if you buy one bit, you have to buy the lot - otherwise you'd be in a difficult situation. You'd be admitting one item is a lie, but claim everything else, from the same mouth is, for sure, as shiny and true as can be!