Do contrails form around low level clouds? [Generally not]

WeedWhacker

Senior Member
So I started calling airports.

No need to do that, as you may have noticed already (FR24, for example). Here is another visual for you....an actual high altitude aviation chart, showing the various routes over Redding, CA:
http://skyvector.com/?ll=40.701047154455814,-122.73980712819852&chart=304&zoom=4

Once you open it (I suggest on a larger monitor screen, for better comprehension) you can use it much like Google Maps....zoom in/out, and hold the mouse button to slew.

Additionally, I have found that the SkyVector website tends to "remember" (probably with cookies) what you previously viewed, each time you open it. Also, it seems to use your IP address to determine location (if no previous cookies).
 

Hama Neggs

Senior Member.
Yes Dane did say a few things that lost him credibility in my opinion, that is a true statement. However if you consider a non-bias mediator to be conducting the interview, on average, the mediator had more unresolved questions for Mick. That's all I was saying. Didn't mean to be impolite to anyone, just going on my observations in general about the debate.

I didn't think you were impolite before, but you are now by continuing with your assertion without offering specifics. Please post on the debate thread what questions you think were unresolved.

PS: The moderator, John Massaria, is fully biased toward Dane's side of the debate and I think he would freely admit that.
 
Last edited:

Trailblazer

Moderator
Staff member
In response to efftup, I have been documenting actually, and in this pic I took marked 10 contrails in a single sitting. So I started calling airports. And on that day, at that time of the pic, two of the 10 trails were accounted for by public aircraft. Horizon and United with flights from SF to Portland and one from Sac to Seattle. There were others that day, absolutely. However at that exact time there were zero others. They were either later at night or earlier in the day.

How many airports did you call? A lot of people make the mistake of assuming that planes flying over them must be going to or from nearby airports. That is not the case at all.

Many of the flights that leave trails over my house in southern England, not far from London, don't have anything to do with the UK at all. I see flights from New York to Dubai, from Holland to the Caribbean, from Germany to the USA, from Ireland to mainland Europe etc etc. In some cases neither the departure or arrival airport is within 3,000 miles of my location!

Here's an example. I just opened up FlightRadar24 and there's a flight from New York to Israel about to pass almost directly overhead. It's overcast and raining at the moment so I won't see it, but if the conditions were right it would be leaving a contrail in my sky, despite never touching down anywhere near the UK!

image.jpg

(Most of the flights around London will be taking off or landing from the local airports and not high enough to be leaving contrails. I usually turn on the filter so the map only shows flights above a certain height, to reduce the clutter and make it easier to spot planes leaving trails.)

That's why using FlightRadar24 etc is so enlightening.
 
Last edited:

Marine0811

Active Member
20141018_100547.jpg The trail here seemingly appears to start and stop in the previous chem cloud, why would a contrail look like this?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
20141018_100547.jpg The trail here seemingly appears to start and stop in the previous chem cloud, why would a contrail look like this?

Is that power line above or below the little cloud in the lower right?

Contrails form in regions of high humidity. So it's quite possible this is just two planes flying through the same region (think of it as an invisible cloud, made visible by the plane's exhaust).

The two trails might not be as close as you think though.
 

Marine0811

Active Member
Is that power line above or below the little cloud in the lower right?

Contrails form in regions of high humidity. So it's quite possible this is just two planes flying through the same region (think of it as an invisible cloud, made visible by the plane's exhaust).

The two trails might not be as close as you think though.

The power line is below as observed by it's clarity and power lines being ground level.

Close or not, is it not odd that it starts and stops at the previous trail?

Do you believe the previous is a trail or natural cloud?
 

WeedWhacker

Senior Member
The trail here seemingly appears to start and stop in the previous chem cloud

First, there is no such thing as a "chemcloud". In that photo, you do NOT have height references. A person's eyesight, and "guess", are not a scientific method.

Second....the title of this thread is "Do contrails form around low-level clouds"

The answer is "No" (although as has been demonstrated, a contrail CAN form at a very low altitude....but only in Arctic or Antarctic temperature conditions. NEAR the ground).
 

Marine0811

Active Member
No. In fact you'd expect trails to start and stop in the same areas if the humidity is not contiguous.


Could be a cirrus could formed from a contrail, but you can also get natural cirrus that look like that. Either way, so what?

Is there a way to differentiate between plane trail clouds and natural clouds?

What would it take to prove they are chemtrails, besides admission from the government and mainstream media?
 

Landru

Moderator
Staff member
Is there a way to differentiate between plane trail clouds and natural clouds?

What would it take to prove they are chemtrails, besides admission from the government and mainstream media?

Some evidence to support any claims made by the chemtrail community.
 

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
Is there a way to differentiate between plane trail clouds and natural clouds?

What would it take to prove they are chemtrails, besides admission from the government and mainstream media?

That they're composed of something other than mostly ice.
Also that the estimated amount of material represented by the 'chemtrail' could actually fit into a plane in the first place.

Perhaps spectrography could be used in analysing potential suspect clouds, not sure if it works on that scale though.
 

Marine0811

Active Member
Some evidence to support any claims made by the chemtrail community.

My point is that chemtrails could be proven on youtube and social media video, but could always be discredited if not shown in mainstream media. All proof is dependent on belief.
 

Marine0811

Active Member
If the trails are just contrails, why do the planes stack the trails in spaced rows, why not fly on the same line/altitude so they don't litter as large an area of the sky?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
How high can planes fly before most of our eyes will lose clarity, such as colors, logos, wings and tail?

Depends on how big the plane is, and more importantly how far away it is.

I can see the livery of a Southwest jet flying directly over me at 32,000 feet. However I can't even see the jet if it's 32,000 feet high and 60 miles away. Yet I can see the contrail quite clearly.

It's utterly nonsensical to claim (as some do) that you can't see contrails jets above a certain altitude, when you can see them 100 to 200 miles away.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
If the trails are just contrails, why do the planes stack the trails in spaced rows, why not fly on the same line/altitude so they don't litter as large an area of the sky?

Here's an interactive demo of two planes flying the EXACT same paths, with some wind. You can play with the variables via the sliders, and move the end points.

 

Marine0811

Active Member
Wind. At altitude wind speed can be over 100 knots.

Thanks.
A lot of trails I see are seemingly laid around the same times because of how compact they are. It seems if wind were causing them to space out, they wouldn't stay in tact.
 

MikeC

Closed Account
At higher altitude "wind" means an airmass that is moving - and without the turbulence caused by buildings, hills, mountains, etc, such air masses are often moving as a single mass in a single direction and all pretty much at he same speed - this is why clouds move across get sky together and usually only change slowly.
 

JRBids

Senior Member.
My point is that chemtrails could be proven on youtube and social media video, but could always be discredited if not shown in mainstream media. All proof is dependent on belief.

Not unless the video is showing the chemtrail juice being loaded into a compartment on the plane. Videos of trails or planes leaving trails do not prove anything.
 

JRBids

Senior Member.
If the trails are just contrails, why do the planes stack the trails in spaced rows, why not fly on the same line/altitude so they don't litter as large an area of the sky?

the planes do fly on the same "roadway". The wind blows the trails in rows. I know I've typed this comment many times: have you ever gone to the beach and laid in the sand and watched the sky. I do it all the time in the summer. Plane flies by, leaves a trail. Trail blows to side. Next plane comes by, leaves a trail, etc. Soon you have a ladder.
 

WeedWhacker

Senior Member
"chemtrail juice".

Funny. Of course, in NO instance is there any hint of this existing. Not where it is "manufactured", nor how it is transported TO an airport, nor how it is "loaded" onto commercial airliners.

No one, no where has EVER come forward. Out of the thousands of people who would be needed, to deliver this "juice"!
 

JRBids

Senior Member.
"chemtrail juice".

Funny. Of course, in NO instance is there any hint of this existing. Not where it is "manufactured", nor how it is transported TO an airport, nor how it is "loaded" onto commercial airliners.

No one, no where has EVER come forward. Out of the thousands of people who would be needed, to deliver this "juice"!


Many of the questions have received reasonable answers which make a lot of sense. The wind blowing a trail to the side, which is easily observed, and it appears like a ladder. A trail being left in the same air mass where a cloud exists. Perspective. I cannot for the life of me understand how these simple, reasonable answers are not sufficient explanations..
 

Rico

Senior Member.
My point is that chemtrails could be proven on youtube and social media video, but could always be discredited if not shown in mainstream media. All proof is dependent on belief.

Yeah... no... don't trust youtube or social media. The only thing that can grant chemtrails any credibility is evidence that is verifiable, within context, and can be scrutinized to the point that goes beyond reasonable doubt. Ground based filming of trails is evidence of nothing. Youtube commenters crying "chemtrails last, contrails don't," is evidence of nothing.
Anecdotal testimony is evidence of nothing, even if it comes from someone who sounds like they know what they are doing.

What matters is quality evidence. Evidence that is not skewed by any biases, or used for the purpose of confirming one's belief, but rather objectively neutral, and systematically tackles the problem at hand.
 

Trailblazer

Moderator
Staff member
Close or not, is it not odd that it starts and stops at the previous trail?

Do you believe the previous is a trail or natural cloud?

This is where the logic breaks down and I just don't understand the "chemtrail" argument.

If the humidity is high enough for a cloud to form in that specific small region of sky (whether a naturally formed cloud or one triggered by jet exhaust) then why is it "odd" that another contrail will persist in that region?

It is EXACTLY what you would expect. Simple logic exactly explains the observed behaviour.
 

Keith Beachy

Senior Member
Wind. At altitude wind speed can be over 100 knots.
We has 200 knots trying to get back to Beale, CA, from Maine, it used up 15,000 pounds of jet fuel and extra time, like an hour. Flying lower had lower winds.

Our "chem-trails", near the equator ( now you know who drew the equator )

Water vapor, becomes the [...] of "chem-trails".
Clouds below.
Who asked about logos? The lead plane is 2 miles, number 2 is 1 mile; formation is 500 foot stack formation, 1 mile.


Chem-trail off... lol, we are at 25 or 27,000 feet. Close up.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

JRBids

Senior Member.
Evidence.



Well, since the government and mainstream media are not to be trusted, why would anyone believe them? ;)

No, that's what it would take for US to believe in chemtrails, because we swallow everything the government and mainstream media feed us.
 

Marine0811

Active Member
Why? Clouds stay intact in the wind.

Forgive me, I am not a meteorologist, but it seems the lighter clouds blow easier than darker, I'm guessing because of weight and moisture content.
Should a plane trail cloud be heavier than a natural cloud, so that it remains in tact for hours while other clouds break apart?
 

Landru

Moderator
Staff member
Forgive me, I am not a meteorologist, but it seems the lighter clouds blow easier than darker, I'm guessing because of weight and moisture content.
Should a plane trail cloud be heavier than a natural cloud, so that it remains in tact for hours while other clouds break apart?

Any evidence to support your claims?
 

Marine0811

Active Member
Not unless the video is showing the chemtrail juice being loaded into a compartment on the plane. Videos of trails or planes leaving trails do not prove anything.

Would it be evidence if the trails were shown at lower cloud level of 6,500ft in warm air?
Even if there were video of chemicals being prepared and loaded, I still don't think it would be believed and accepted by the majority if not shown in the mainstream. Most would remain unaware if it wasn't mainstream.
 

Marine0811

Active Member
Many of the questions have received reasonable answers which make a lot of sense. The wind blowing a trail to the side, which is easily observed, and it appears like a ladder. A trail being left in the same air mass where a cloud exists. Perspective. I cannot for the life of me understand how these simple, reasonable answers are not sufficient explanations..
The trails I observe have a seemingly controlled or timed spread, not what I would expect from chaotic wind dispersion.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
The trails I observe have a seemingly controlled or timed spread, not what I would expect from chaotic wind dispersion.

There is no "chaotic wind dispersion", as noted above, the high altitude winds tend to move the entire air mass. The trails simply get carried along.

Have a look at this:
http://earth.nullschool.net/#current/wind/surface/level/orthographic=-111.52,38.64,3000
Surface winds:


Winds at cruising altitudes (250 hPa)


A lot faster, and a lot smoother.
 

MikeC

Closed Account
I have recorded and observed a lot of cloud and trail movement, I repeatedly observe lighter colored clouds moving and breaking apart faster than darker clouds.

Possibly because lighter coloured clouds are thinner.

Clouds both absorb and scatter light - so the sunlight that hits the top gets scattered in all directions, and some of it gets absorbed each time it scatters.

If the clouds are thin then some of the sunlight gets scattered downwards and very little gets absorbed in the process, so we can see it as a white cloud.

However if the clouds are thick enough then no sunlight lasts long enough to reach the bottom - and hence the bottom of them looks dark.
 
Last edited:
Top