Ian Simpson / Look-up.org.uk debunks chemtrails & geoengineering

[Ray Von Geezer]

It'd be more accurate to say he debunks himself, exposing both the inconsistencies in his argument and his lack of understanding at the same time.

Ian has written a response - Is George Monbiot a minion? to George Monbiot's article "The contrails conspiracy is not only garbage, it's letting aviation off the hook too". Ian has created a rather rambling piece which makes some extraordinary claims. For example, accusing Monbiot of not being interested in aircraft emissions (Monbiot has written about the topic regularly since at least 2006 and the Chairman of British Airways once said of him:-

"If we find the right way to harness the support of the travelling public, we can make real progress on climate change – and isolate the George Monbiots of this world who will never be satisfied until every runway is grassed over."

He also shows an example of Facebook supposedly "censoring" his posts, which is simply because he's viewing them using the "Top Comments" filter - apparently he's simply not a top commenter!

His most damaging and extraordinary claim is this one:-

Why do some contrails disappear almost instantly whilst other are long lasting? This is dependent on the ambient atmospheric conditions such as temperature, pressure and humidity. Contrails can grow and continue to spread forming persistent contrails that can last for several hours and become indistinguishable from naturally occurring cirrus clouds.

So, firstly, water vapour ejected from a jet engine cannot increase in volume over time. If a fixed mass of anything spreads, it thins, a scientific principle even children can understand easily.

Content from external source

The first paragraph is taken from the UK Department Of Transport Contrail Fact Sheet, the second is Ian's response stating why they are lying.

Ian simultaneously claims that even a child knows a "fixed mass" thins as it spreads, and that substances sprayed from planes can spread and fill the sky.

I only wish I could point this out to him

Ray Von

 

[Trailblazer]

His most damaging and extraordinary claim is this one:-

Why do some contrails disappear almost instantly whilst other are long lasting? This is dependent on the ambient atmospheric conditions such as temperature, pressure and humidity. Contrails can grow and continue to spread forming persistent contrails that can last for several hours and become indistinguishable from naturally occurring cirrus clouds.

So, firstly, water vapour ejected from a jet engine cannot increase in volume over time. If a fixed mass of anything spreads, it thins, a scientific principle even children can understand easily.

Content from external source

The first paragraph is taken from the UK Department Of Transport Contrail Fact Sheet, the second is Ian's response stating why they are lying.

Ian simultaneously claims that even a child knows a "fixed mass" thins as it spreads, and that substances sprayed from planes can spread and fill the sky.

I only wish I could point this out to him

He's actually hit on one of the clearest and simplest debunkings of chemtrails that there is. Can he really not see that?!

It's quite mind-boggling.


On a less obvious note, this claim was pretty odd too:

[bunk]The entire month of November was grey (at least over London) during the day but strangely at night – when there is no aviation – we had mostly clear skies with clean, crisp air. Even the BBC reported that November had been the “dullest month on record” so sorry George, wrong again. Fact. Check. Perhaps.[/bunk]

While it is true that November was the dullest November on record (but not the dullest month on record overall), it is nonsense to say that the skies were clear and "crisp" at night. Anyone in northern latitudes knows that clear skies at this time of year are associated with cold nights, and the nights were anything but cold. Where I live just outside London we only had two air frosts all month. The nights were remarkable for their mildness, with minimum temperatures often in double figures (Celsius)!



Looking at the figures for the country as a whole, it is clear that the night-time minima were extremely high, which is not what you would expect with clear nights!


(http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate/uk/summaries/anomacts)


Ian even says himself:

[bunk] Have they also failed to notice that when it is cloudy in the winter, it is unnaturally warm, and when there is no cloud it is bloody freezing[/bunk]

Another contradiction!

The reason it was so cloudy and mild is quite simple - because the wind direction was southwesterly for almost the whole month, bringing in very mild and moist air from the Atlantic. This is not an uncommon pattern for the UK, although the duration of time we have been stuck in it is quite noteworthy.


And in any case, it has mostly been a very sunny year in the UK. November was an exception. Winter 2014/15 was the sunniest on record:




April 2015 was also the sunniest April on record:

 

[Henk001]

Another claim in Ian's response is about the temperature and height at which persistent contrails could form.

Water vapour from jet engines does not condense above -57 Celsius, a temperature which is not often found below 37,000ft in a temperate zone. We regularly see aircraft leaving many different types of trails as low as 18,000ft over London, even on hot summer days. Impossible.

Content from external source

What does the science say? In this article (Calculations of Aircraft Contrail formation Critical Temperatures (Mark L. Schrader)
http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/full/10.1175/1520-0450(1997)036<1725:COACFC>2.0.CO;2
you can find that the critical temperature drops with height (pressure). At 500 hPa (roughly 18.000 ft) it can be as high as -35°C, for a modern engine with a contrail factor of 0.039

And this isn't even about supersaturated regions (hum > 100%)

 

[Trailblazer]

The -57ºC figure was quoted (incorrectly) by the UK Met Office for a time, and Ian latched onto it.

 

[deirdre]

you guys don't have aviation at night?

 

[Balance]

you guys don't have aviation at night?

Mostly no, due to noise-abatement.

Restrictions on operations
This includes things like limitations on operational times – such as not allowing flights to land or take-off at night – or on the total number of operations. The specific types of aircraft that could be operated could also be restricted to mitigate impacts on a site-by-site basis.

Currently, some form of restriction exists on night flights at nineteen UK airports:

Aberdeen Bristol Farnborough London Gatwick Manchester
Belfast City Cardiff Glasgow London Heathrow Oxford
Birmingham East Midlands Leeds/Bradford London Luton Southampton
Bournemouth Edinburgh London City London Stansted

Content from external source

https://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?catid=2827&pagetype=90&pageid=16158

 

[Trailspotter]

you guys don't have aviation at night?

Mostly no, due to noise-abatement.

Restrictions on operations
This includes things like limitations on operational times – such as not allowing flights to land or take-off at night – or on the total number of operations. The specific types of aircraft that could be operated could also be restricted to mitigate impacts on a site-by-site basis.

Currently, some form of restriction exists on night flights at nineteen UK airports:

Aberdeen Bristol Farnborough London Gatwick Manchester
Belfast City Cardiff Glasgow London Heathrow Oxford
Birmingham East Midlands Leeds/Bradford London Luton Southampton
Bournemouth Edinburgh London City London Stansted

Content from external source

https://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?catid=2827&pagetype=90&pageid=16158

There are transcontinental flights that cross the UK airspace at night.

 

[Arbitrary]

There are transcontinental flights that cross the UK airspace at night.

Shhh - All the chemtrail believing people think planes only go near a (working) airport or airbase. So if it has no flights there can't be anything in the sky......

 

[Trailblazer]

There are transcontinental flights that cross the UK airspace at night.

Yes, I work late hours so I am often commuting home by bike well after midnight, and I frequently see contrails on moonlit nights. (And there are infrequent late arrivals/departures at Heathrow which go roaring above the house at unsociable hours - I believe the airlines have to pay fines for such events.)

For comparison, here is the current FR24 picture (about 1.30pm), filtered to show flights above 28000ft:



And here it was at just after midnight last night:



Those ones crossing the London area are flights from America to mainland Europe, and there are plenty of them through the night, as well as some (but far fewer) in the other direction.

 

[Ray Von Geezer]

To add a bit of context, I did a quick Google of Look-Up to get some of Ian's previous claims regarding how contrails are able to grow:-

"Partly cloudy?"

The image below is the satellite image from Worldview for October 10th. It shows very clearly the mess created by the spreading of those trails across most of England. As this type of trail spreads it forms a translucent layer of haze which initially only partially blocks the sun, but as it becomes thicker, eventually blankets the entire sky and blocks the sun completely.

Content from external source

"From wing to cloud"

A simple page with a simple theme. Here we watch as a plane flies over and sprays 2 difference substances from each pair engines on each side. We can clearly see the left and right trails evolve completely differently. One pair of trails turn into white spikey lines that fade into circular puffs and eventually disappear, while the other pair quickly start to spread into tiny spreading cloudlets. These cloudlets will eventually spread into an entire cloud bank that can cover huge distances. Water vapour simply cannot do that.

Content from external source

"The Met Office wouldn't lie to us. Would they?"

When you see the entire process from wing to huge cloud bank covering vast areas, suddenly the enormity and bitter reality of this situation becomes abundantly clear,

Content from external source

Ray Von

 

[Chew]

Self-replicating nano particles!

 

[Jay Reynolds]

His most damaging and extraordinary claim is this one:-

Why do some contrails disappear almost instantly whilst other are long lasting? This is dependent on the ambient atmospheric conditions such as temperature, pressure and humidity. Contrails can grow and continue to spread forming persistent contrails that can last for several hours and become indistinguishable from naturally occurring cirrus clouds.

So, firstly, water vapour ejected from a jet engine cannot increase in volume over time. If a fixed mass of anything spreads, it thins, a scientific principle even children can understand easily.

Content from external source

The first paragraph is taken from the UK Department Of Transport Contrail Fact Sheet, the second is Ian's response stating why they are lying.

Ian simultaneously claims that even a child knows a "fixed mass" thins as it spreads, and that substances sprayed from planes can spread and fill the sky.

I only wish I could point this out to him

Ray Von

The real point here is that a persistent contrail can grow, but it does so not by thinning, as Ian says, but rather by gathering moisture already present in the ice supersaturated air. The graphic below shows the extent for which this is possible, as reported in a peer reviewed paper decades ago.



I just sent the above info to Mr. Ian so he has been informed of his error and the true state of affairs.

 

[Chew]

It shows very clearly the mess created by the spreading of those trails across most of England.

Content from external source

So if mass can't increase, how many aircraft would be required to cover England in aluminum nanomagicalparticulates?

England covers 130,279 km².
Cirrus clouds have a liquid water content of 0.03 g/m³.
Let's be generous and assume the "chemtrails" are only 10 meters thick.
Aluminum has a density of 2.7.
Assume a fully-laden European Boeing 747-8I only carries 10% of its fuel load so it can take-off, get to altitude, drop its load, and land. The amount of chemjuice it could carry is its max take-off weight - operating weight empty - 10% fuel load = 213,500 kg.

It would require 494 flights by 747-8Is to accomplish this task. Seems plausible.

 

[Efftup]

So if mass can't increase, how many aircraft would be required to cover England in aluminum nanomagicalparticulates?

It would require 494 flights by 747-8Is to accomplish this task. Seems plausible.

Not if you still think the Military is involved in Spraying.
Perusing the list of Active UK Military aircraft, the UK has 12 x Airbus Voyagers (based on A330), 6 x E3-Ds, 2 xRC135s ~(both based on Boeing 707), 8 x C17, 6 x A400M. 4 x Bae146 and 2 x Avro RJ That's only 40 aircraft of roughly Airbus A318 family size or bigger.

for the UK MILITARY to achieve this, they would need ALL THOSE AIRCRAFT flying 32 flights a day each for a total of 1,280 flights.

So each plane has 45 minutes to load up completely with 10% fuel and lots of chemjuice, take off, reach spray area, do the spraying and return to base and land and do it constantly for 24 hours.