Debunked: Iain Carstairs' Chemtrail Conspiracy Theories

[Ross Marsden]

This is crazy. There's like eight questions demanding replies across multiple blogs. besides private messages from someone on your blog, I got Mick, MikeC, Cairenn, Belfrey - It's like some kind of mugging! You're gonna have to wait, or get busy picking someone else to pieces - I'm busy looking at spectrometry stuff! I'm only one person, not five!

Ha! That's what I felt like when you hit me with 7 tweets in as many minutes! Well, that's what it seemed like.

I would like to see you get straightened out with using internet sites to identify planes you can see in the sky.
After you are satisfied that they are all accounted for, or nearly so, then we can get on to how and why contrails form, and how and why they dissipate, or not.
After you are comfortable with the behaviour of water (all 3 states) in the upper troposphere, we can move onto air traffic patterns and the way the density has changed over time.

So, relax. You have come to the right place for the information you seek. I'm sorry and I apologise if you feel like you are being mugged (although I'm not responsible for it). You see, we all have specialties, and you are jumping all over them. Pick one topic and stick to that until we've cleared it up for you.

You are doing well, and thanks for persisting.

 

[MikeC]

He seems to say, 2:19, "but where they're spraying, is up in the stratosphere. and there's very rarely, much if any humidity up in those areas and you will not get persistent contrails in there."

Yep - he says that.

It is nonsense of course - you can get atmospheric soundings for the UK from this site FYI - there is relative humidity all the way up to 16km altitude - a long way above the altitude commercial a/c are flying these days.

It just goes to show how bankrupt the idea is that he has to continue pushing falsehoods even when cornered like a rat and forced to admit just a smidgen of truth!

Today I saw a BA flight at 29,000 feet, no contrail at all. Zero. He was literally floating in the blue. but left and right were long white streamers from non-trackable planes, and this stuff hung around a very long time - I would say most of the day, from 11:00 am ish to late afternoon.

Got a flight number?

 

[Jay Reynolds]

FSW and Iain,

As the thread i the link below shows, I have long advocated for positive action by those who believe in chemtrails to take positive steps to identify the planes they are seeing. Besides using flight tracking feeds, the use of telephoto photography has advanced far beyond what most people believe is possible. Even if you believe that you are seeing military jets, it is quite feasible to identify even those planes. In the thread, I outline my observations of the way in which over a decade has been wasted by the chemtrails advocates and my ideas for how real solutions can be found.

14 years of Chemtrails- Comments and Suggestions

As an example of what is possible, see this photo:
http://www.skystef.be/contrail/united-states-air-force.htm

 

[Unregistered]

This is crazy. There's like eight questions demanding replies across multiple blogs. besides private messages from someone on your blog, I got Mick, MikeC, Cairenn, Belfrey - It's like some kind of mugging! You're gonna have to wait, or get busy picking someone else to pieces - I'm busy looking at spectrometry stuff! I'm only one person, not five!

they have a habit of keeping this one off....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdO8I3p6zJ4
CHEMTRAIL SPRAYING TANKER CAUGHT BY PRIVATE JET SPRAYING

 

[Belfrey]

they have a habit of keeping this one off....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdO8I3p6zJ4
CHEMTRAIL SPRAYING TANKER CAUGHT BY PRIVATE JET SPRAYING

That one has been discussed here many times, and in fact the original version of the video is embedded in the Aerodynamic and Rainbow Contrails ContrailScience page. As mentioned at 0:34 of your edited version, the video was originally posted by YouTube poster USAFFEKC10A, who says:

This is the original unadulterated video that started all the fuss. It is completely authentic and no camera tricks were used. It is simply a couple of KC-10's in formation and the audio you hear is just us poking fun at all the "chemtrail" conspiratorists. I knew when I shot the video that this would be catnip for all the conspiratorists out there. Yeah, the contrails have an odd way of "starting" and "stopping" but that is easily explained with physics. It's no different than the lenticular clouds that form over a mountain or the fog that flows from an open freezer. So, stop being so gullible, kids. There are truely bad things in the world but this isn't one of them!

Content from External Source

By the way, USAFFEKC10A is still active on YT, and appears willing to dialogue with chemtrails believers if you have questions for him.

 

[scombrid]

None of the spray planes show up on planefinder. The planes which DO show up - don't leave any trails at all.

I haven't had any problem finding the spray planes using web-based plane-finding programs.

The following are two photos I snapped on a flight from Chicago to Orlando last August. It was late afternoon. The long dark line is my plane's shadow on the clouds below us. That's a hell of a trail coming from a SWA Boeing 737 in order to cast a shadow like that. Southwest flights show up on planefinder, flightaware, etc... So I've identified "spray planes" using web based software and I've ridden on more flights than I can count that were creating trails.

 

[scombrid]

Oh, and when I was watching our plane's shadow on the clouds below us we traversed a contrail left by another jet. The grey looking smutz in the foreground is an aged contrail that we were flying through.

 

[Jay Reynolds]

I see that Iain has taken his formerly public tweets underground. Very embarassing situation.
The record now shows:

"@iain39's tweets are protected.
Only confirmed followers have access to @iain39's Tweets and complete profile. Click the "Follow" button to send a follow request."

https://twitter.com/iain39

When I have time, I will try to enumerate for the record the questions he refused to answer

 

[Mick West]

I see that Iain has taken his formerly public tweets underground. Very embarassing situation.
The record now shows:

https://twitter.com/iain39

When I have time, I will try to enumerate for the record the questions he refused to answer

Maybe he's gone off to reconsider his position? I'd wait until we hear from him again.

 

[iain carstairs]

Maybe he's gone off to reconsider his position? I'd wait until we hear from him again.

In the first place, the trails I have been talking about are ones which I have seen, and compared to the CAA type planes which I have seen. I can't vouch for your photos and don't intend to. I've since found that people as long as 13 years ago in America were taking note of trackable planes not leaving the same mess as non-trackable planes. I see also that some posters here were just as active then, and just as aggressive. So I'm hardly likely to change anything with my information.

Elswhere on the site I see people dodging scientific evidence about fluoride, which is really inexplicable. Harvard themselves released a study last year that IQ was lower in fluroidated areas - and it was the 29th study so to do. People turn up with intensive research and credible evidence, and they get a reply like, so, how much carbon monoxide should a baby get? This is absurd.

The whole point of a debate is to debate. but this is just people who for whatever reason, cannot absorb other opinions and don't want to. And every time you venture a reply, you get double the number of people shouting you down, and even insulting! Nobody has time for this. Don't believe in chemtrails? Then don't believe in them. Want flouride? Get as much as you like; it seems virtually free. If you think WTC7 was not brought down by demolition, that's your business. But seeing that you all peddle all the government lines - this is quite a coincidence, and is the one thing which convinces me I was right all along: chemtrails, certainly in the UK, are a military operation. All I want is an enquiry, and I intend to get one.

 

[Mick West]

But Iain, you are making claims that seem eminently testable. So why not test them? Why not prove your case?

Just take some photos of planes leaving contrails that you can't identify, and note the time, place and direction of shot (ideally use the Theodolite app to take the photos). We can then use planefinder.net to confirm your observations, and then your case would be proven?

You can even engage some other pro-chemtrail people to verify our/your work.

Why not? Why not prove your case? Not to us, but to the world?

 

[scombrid]

People turn up with intensive research and credible evidence,

Insisting that the planes leaving the persistent trails are "non-trackable" when others have plainly demonstrated that the flights are track-able does not constitute intensive research or credible evidence. I and many others have no problem tracking planes that are leaving persistent contrails. Such tracking is not limited to those skeptical of the chemtrail conspiracy theory. Many strong believers have no problem tracking spray planes. Youtubers Peekay and Cajonmiracle are two vociferous examples. Then there's Maxbliss or whatever he calls himself.

Then there is my personal experience. I've identified the flights via computer. I've watched flights leave trails from the window of another plane. It sure looks like commercial passenger traffic generating the lion share of trails.

The whole point of a debate is to debate. but this is just people who for whatever reason, cannot absorb other opinions and don't want to.

If the whole point is debate then why are you expecting people to absorb your opinion? If they think you are mistaken then they're right to say so if the point is debate, correct?

Don't believe in chemtrails? Then don't believe in them.

If you believe that the persistent contrails are chemtrails, don't you want to get correct information about the "spray" planes? The inability to identify the planes seems to be your limitation. Other chemtrail promoters have youtube videos, blog posts, etc... calling out various airlines for being "sprayers". They are able to identify the planes. People in this thread have supplied ample information demonstrating that the planes can indeed be identified. Can't you enlist the help of these people to test your claims, to see if they are unable to locate the spray planes for you?

 

[SR1419]

Hi Iain-

Here are some close-ups of commercial planes leaving long, persistent contrails- Any thoughts?

(notice in the last video- the lower plane leaves a long contrail whilst the plane higher up leaves a short contrail indicating its in drier air)


​

​

​

 

[Jay Reynolds]

But Iain, you are making claims that seem eminently testable. So why not test them? Why not prove your case?

Just take some photos of planes leaving contrails that you can't identify, and note the time, place and direction of shot (ideally use the Theodolite app to take the photos). We can then use planefinder.net to confirm your observations, and then your case would be proven?

You can even engage some other pro-chemtrail people to verify our/your work.

Why not? Why not prove your case? Not to us, but to the world?

Another point in science is repeatability. We have found the persistent contrails and been able to identify them on flight tracking software. As has been pointed out, others have identified them yet still believe they are spray. If Iain's hypothesis is correct, he will be able to ALWAYS show the data Mick asks for and the data he shows will ALWAYS be unidentifiable. He will prove repeatability is attainable.

There has always been a 'tipping point' for the rational ones. Very few rational people, and I consider Iain as being fairly rational about most things, will accept that there is any way that commercial passenger planes are spraying stuff. The security and logistical problems are really too difficult.

This leaves a person like Iain with a choice, he can claim that these planes are "unidentifiable", or he must accept that his previously held belief has no merit. That is a great obstacle to overcome, but Iain if I read your character correctly, you will force yourself to do a better job of documenting your observations as Mick suggests, because you have the sort of personal pride it takes to persevere against an obstacle like this. I'll bet you already know someone with a telescope and are looking at the sites I recommended to take photos of these jets of sufficient clarity so that they can be documented and identified without question.I also bet that you will eventually develop the expertise to do the same as Mick suggests and prove us all wrong once and for all, if you can.