How might some test chemtrails? Spectroscopy?

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
There are quite a few suggestions for that - the main one is to directly sample the trail, which is actually do-able, and perhaps have it analysed at several labs to allay suspicion of tampered results. The other is plane tracking/identification; identify the plane the suspect trail came from with flight tracking software and telephoto lenses, then look into it's maintenance and fuelling schedules to see where it was done, what fuel was put in, go to the airport, watch the people working, etc. Samples of the fuel used could be got.

(it's possible off-topic discussions will be moved to their own thread or an already existing one - there's a thread on most chemtrail related questions here. Mick likes to keep things organised.)
 

TWCobra

Senior Member.
I wonder why no-one has considered spectroscopy. Surely if we can analyse the light from stars millions of light years away then we can point a spectroscope at a persistent contrail and end this once and for all.
 

Jazzy

Closed Account
I wonder why no-one has considered spectroscopy. Surely if we can analyse the light from stars millions of light years away then we can point a spectroscope at a persistent contrail and end this once and for all.
But they have, in that laser tools have been/are used both looking upward from the ground, and looking downward from satellite. Not that I suppose the scientists were looking for materials they didn't expect to find.
 

Ross Marsden

Senior Member.
I wonder why no-one has considered spectroscopy. Surely if we can analyse the light from stars millions of light years away then we can point a spectroscope at a persistent contrail and end this once and for all.

We get a visible light crystallography often enough when cirrostratus clearly originated from contrails displays impressive halos arcs and sundogs exactly the same as those displayed in completely naturally formed cirrostratus. The two cloudscapes can only be composed of the same substance with the same crystal geometry; water ice. A different substance would have a different display.

This is a fairly stringent test. Very hard to fake.

I am amused by the idea of sending up an aircraft to take in situ samples. Wouldn't that very aircraft produce "chemtrails" as it closed on its target? That would be a bit embarrassing.

There is no need to actually take a sample. Use a "trusted" aircraft. Any aircraft will do. Identify one that is "chemtrailing", and have it inspected when it lands. If there is no spray equipment, it then becomes the "trusted" aircraft, post facto. Conclude that chemtrails don't exist after all. If it does have spray equipment, then we have some work to do.

It's difficult to find a fault with either if these simple tests. Yet they are done every day, in a sense. It's hard to understand why this (chemtrails) has had legs for 15 years.
 

HappyMonday

Moderator
We get a visible light crystallography often enough when cirrostratus clearly originated from contrails displays impressive halos arcs and sundogs exactly the same as those displayed in completely naturally formed cirrostratus. The two cloudscapes can only be composed of the same substance with the same crystal geometry; water ice. A different substance would have a different display.

This is a fairly stringent test. Very hard to fake.

I am amused by the idea of sending up an aircraft to take in situ samples. Wouldn't that very aircraft produce "chemtrails" as it closed on its target? That would be a bit embarrassing.

There is no need to actually take a sample. Use a "trusted" aircraft. Any aircraft will do. Identify one that is "chemtrailing", and have it inspected when it lands. If there is no spray equipment, it then becomes the "trusted" aircraft, post facto. Conclude that chemtrails don't exist after all. If it does have spray equipment, then we have some work to do.

It's difficult to find a fault with either if these simple tests. Yet they are done every day, in a sense. It's hard to understand why this (chemtrails) has had legs for 15 years.

It's because many of the believers don't want it to turn out wrong and as such are not open to that possibility, because they love the idea they're fighting the good fight by spreading the nonsense. Without providing the demo for EVERY SINGLE believer on the planet simultaneously and in person, no demonstration will ever be acceptable.

If you flew a moon hoax believer to the moon and showed them the Apollo equipment, upon their return they'd be denounced as a patsy and ignored, and spurious claims about their photos and footage created.

Many of these guys armour each other against the facts...You must have seen it on twitter, those users who intervene in arguments when you debunk a claim, and sort of shephard the individual away from the big bad debunker?

That's the funny thing about the denouncement of language like 'nut-job' (which I agree isn't helpful terminology)...It really is interesting from a psychological perspective, to me at least. Folie a deux.
 

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
We get a visible light crystallography often enough when cirrostratus clearly originated from contrails displays impressive halos arcs and sundogs exactly the same as those displayed in completely naturally formed cirrostratus. The two cloudscapes can only be composed of the same substance with the same crystal geometry; water ice. A different substance would have a different display.

That's great, I didn't know or think of this simple use of logic.

Are there tests and proofs for this? ie, how alduteration of water ice with other substances would effect the ability of light to prism?
 

SeanDWalker

New Member
That's great, I didn't know or think of this simple use of logic.

Are there tests and proofs for this? ie, how alduteration of water ice with other substances would effect the ability of light to prism?

I'm also curious of this,

on one day i suspected chemtrails (criss-crossing spreading contrails, with clouds seemingly developing from them), i also saw a very amazing light show, rainbows all over, upside down, wiggly ones, it was bizarre and though all very black swan, i have only seen this twice, on days where contrails were spreading to form clouds, the second time was far less spectacular, but still what i presume they call sun dogs.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I'm also curious of this,

on one day i suspected chemtrails (criss-crossing spreading contrails, with clouds seemingly developing from them), i also saw a very amazing light show, rainbows all over, upside down, wiggly ones, it was bizarre and though all very black swan, i have only seen this twice, on days where contrails were spreading to form clouds, the second time was far less spectacular, but still what i presume they call sun dogs.

Sun Dogs are just one of several type of solar halos, see:

http://www.atoptics.co.uk/halo/common.htm



There are others as well, check the links on the right at AtOptics, under Ice Halos.
 
Last edited:

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
That's great, I didn't know or think of this simple use of logic.

Are there tests and proofs for this? ie, how alduteration of water ice with other substances would effect the ability of light to prism?

The shape of the halos (and their angular positions relative to the sun) proves that it is comprised of crystals with the same heaxgonal structure and refractive index of water ice. That immediately rules out powders like iron oxide or titanium oxide. It also rules out frozen liquids with a different refractive index, or other suggestions like oil.
 

Jazzy

Closed Account
The shape of the halos (and their angular positions relative to the sun) proves that it is comprised of crystals with the same heaxgonal structure and refractive index of water ice. That immediately rules out powders like iron oxide or titanium oxide. It also rules out frozen liquids with a different refractive index, or other suggestions like oil.
An argument I used with the Bard of Ely. Friday night off for me. Thanks Mick. Right on. There should be more sites with Atoptics's quality. Does this site have a list of quality sites?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
An argument I used with the Bard of Ely. Friday night off for me. Thanks Mick. Right on. There should be more sites with Atoptics's quality. Does this site have a list of quality sites?

I've got somewhat of a list on ContrailScience.com in the "Links" section (Under articles and feedback, above Clouds of the World, in the left sidebar) . Some might be out of date now.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
The whole optics argument might make a good CS article. I've not really bothered so far as very few "chemtrails" actually have color in them. But then there are quite a few "chembow" posts.

 
Last edited:

captfitch

Senior Member.
It might but I would need to see some "rainbows" created by something other than pure water or ice. And you would have a hard time with all the images that were not processed or recorded correctly. Or not modified after the fact. I say you shouldn't bother.
 

Belfrey

Senior Member.
I would just add that there have been some scientific studies that sampled directly from persistent contrails using aircraft. One example is Petzold et al. (1998), "Elemental composition and morphology of ice-crystal residual particles in cirrus clouds and contrails" in the journal Atmospheric Research. They sampled ice from both natural and contrail cirrus - other than the ice itself, they found particles composed of carbon, oxygen, and sulfur in the contrails as well as small amounts of Cr, Fe, and Ni in proportions consistent with stainless steel (from engine wear).
 
Top