Useful Chemtrail Debunking Images and Infographics

Hi peeps,

I've made a video explaining the basics of chemtrails vs contrails. Anyone wanna check to see if it makes sense?

If you like it, feel free to use it to your advantage :)


very nice. the beginning was a bit cumbersome to (I'm a ditz) the layman perhaps. the WATER coming out of the engine wasn't real clear, the type was a lot to read and faded before I could really digest it ( and I have prior knowledge of all this, so for a newbie maybe less words? )

but overall very very nice. beautiful graphics. good music. great layout and premise!! well done!
 
Thanks Deirdre :)

I hope the bit about the jets and the water does work.. but yah, I could have left it up for a bit longer to let it sink in. I'm going to wait and see how people respond to it, and maybe change it if necessary :)
 
Here is a picture from the Farnborough Airshow, showing the inside of the A350 test plane, just in case the chemtrail community decides to make use of it

http://blogs.seattletimes.com/boein...or-airbus-and-boeing-at-farnborough-air-show/

Frank-Chapman-Airbus-test-pilot-2014.jpg
 
Introducing ice nuclei into a supersaturated region?



Interesting, but note this is a supersaturated solution, a bit different to a supersaturated vapor. It's a good illustration of the need for a seed (nuclei) of the same molecular surface structure as the substance. Then there's also freezing of supercooled water, a similar process.
 
This is a useful site for getting maps of the weather conditions at contrail height, in North America or Europe.

http://www.instantweathermaps.com/

At the top, click "Maps", then select "GFS", then the region you want, e.g. "CONUS", then "Upper Air". You get this menu:

Capture.PNG

The left hand drop-down menu lets you choose the time of the weather model run. You can go back about a week.
The second one chooses the parameter. Relative Humidity and Temperature are the most useful for contrails.
The third one is the height. 300mb = about 30,000ft. 250mb is about 34,000ft. Not all parameters are available at all levels. (See millibars to altitude table here.)
The fourth one is the forecast time, e.g. in this screenshot, 3 hours on from 2014-07-31 06Z will be for 09Z, or 9am UTC on July 31.

Capture2.PNG

A few caveats:

One, it's a model, so it is necessarily an approximation of the true complex weather patterns. As you step further forward, it will get less accurate. However, if you choose the "0h", i.e. starting point, for a time in the past then it should give a good picture.

Two, and related to this, it's a large-scale overview. Very local variations in weather conditions won't show up.

Three, not all contrail heights are shown. It might be very humid at 300mb but much less so at 250mb.

Four, don't forget the temperature. It can be really humid, but if the air is too warm then you won't get persistent trails.


Nevertheless, it is a very good tool for explaining, and even predicting, contrail formation.
 
I'm getting a different menu, with no option for Humidity or pressure. Are you maybe logged in?
No, I don't have an account.

Are you sure you selected "Upper Air"?

When you choose "GFS" you should then get more pop-up menus out to the right, firstly for the region, and then when you hover over that one, you get a second one offering "Multi-Variable (NVEP Clone)", "Surface" and "Upper Air".

Here, this should be a direct link with the right setting selected:

http://www.instantweathermaps.com/GFS-php/conusupper.php
 
Revealing the physics behind 'hole-punch' clouds

External Quote:

GABRIELLA MUNOZ
SUNDAY, 03 AUGUST 2014
These weird cloud formations have baffled science enthusiasts and amateur photographers for ages.

976bc2e02d79f4e9a217f3efc9c2c72b.jpg

Image: H. Raab/NASA
Looks as if Manny Pacquiao’s signature right hook or Mike Tyson’s feared uppercut have punched through the clouds, right?

Hole-punch clouds were first reported in the 1940s. Laypeople had been trying to find an explanation for ages, and some even claimed that the holes could have been formed due to supernatural causes. But a few scientists started to track the rare occurrence and suggested that they were probably linked to rocket launches--and their guess was pretty close to the actual cause.

The ‘giant’ holes that seem to disrupt otherwise continuous layers of clouds are often made by airplanes.

Imagine a layer of clouds with water droplets at subfreezing temperatures below -15 degrees Celsius--these layers are known as altocumulus. Now, picture an aircraft going through it, punching the clouds with its nose and making the hole ‘bigger’. This happens thanks to the propeller and/or wings, which alter the temperature of the clouds by cooling the air and forming ice crystals that then fall to the earth below, leaving a void behind.

Also known as Fallstreak holes, they can also produce rain or snow. Andrew Heymsfield, a scientist with the US National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), explained in a press release back in 2011:

“Any time aircraft fly through these specific conditions, they are altering the clouds in a way that can result in enhanced precipitation nearby. Just by flying an airplane through these clouds, you could produce as much precipitation as with seeding materials along the same path in the cloud.”

This is literally pretty cool, right?

 
For sure you too have heard the chemtrailist mantra for contrail formation:

8000 meters or more, -40 C or less, 70% relative humidity or more
Well, again I am sure that everyone here know SAC and the Appleman diagram which shows very clearly that contrails do form even in very dry air, under a certain critical temperature which depends primarily on pressure but also on the fuel/engine characteristics. The point is that chemtrailists, mostly on purpose, muddle the water lumping together the condition for persistent contrails. This is simply given by the ice supersaturation region which by no means is limited above 70%. I plotted a diagram for this purpose, showing the critical relative humidity for ice supersaturation as a function of temperature, following an approximated formula used by U. Schumann, A contrail cirrus prediction model, Geosci. Model Dev., 5 (2012).

As you can see, for sufficiently low temperatures the relative humidity required for persistent contrails can be smaller than 60%, or even less.

Use at your will, under CC-BY license :-)

ice_supersat.png
 
I am not sure if the following slide from a presentation by DLR Germany in 2010 was posted here or on contrailscience.com, but anyway I think it is a great visual proof regarding the role of engine in contrail formation. As stated, in agreement with SAC theory and Appleman calculations, more efficient engines trigger contrails more easily.

The photo was taken during a detailed study of the physical and chemical properties of young contrails by means of a special aircraft equipped with loads of instruments. See CONCERT campaign and his followup ML-CIRRUS with even more instruments. A great video on board of the aircraft was produced by German TV WDR/ARD, just 10 minutes but very worthwile.

modern_vs_old_jets.jpg
 
Hi peeps,

I've made a video explaining the basics of chemtrails vs contrails. Anyone wanna check to see if it makes sense?

If you like it, feel free to use it to your advantage :)



Peter,
this is great! I especially enjoyed the criss-cross pattern animation and the final NATS animation which I saw somewhere in the past bit forgotten the link. Very nicely done, visually oriented to answer all those people who keep saying "look up the sky! It is that simple!" :)
I'll try to prepare Italian captions, I still have to test how to do it within YT.
BTW, YT search is soooo crappy that searching for your exact title shows me a loooong list of chemtrailist videos! This is f**ng unbelievable ... :-(
 
Last edited:
Actually, yes.....that is a GREAT image. One that has used before, and should be used over and over again!

"Thumbs up"!

A quotable published reference about the theory and experimental observations regarding this is the following:
Ulrich Schumann, "Influence of propulsion efficiency on contrail formation",
Aerospace Science and Technology, Volume 4, Issue 6, September 2000, Pages 391–401,
DOI: 10.1016/S1270-9638(00)01062-2
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1270963800010622

Abstract

Aircraft cause contrails when flying in an atmosphere colder than a threshold temperature which depends on the overall efficiency η of propulsion of the aircraft/engine combination. Higher η causes contrails at higher ambient temperatures and over a larger range of flight altitudes. The ratio of temperature increase relative to moisture increase in engine plumes is lower for engines with higher η . Thermodynamic arguments are given for this fact and measurements and observations are reported which support the validity of the given criterion. The measurements include contrail observations for identified aircraft flying at ambient temperature and humidity conditions measured with high precision in-situ instruments, measurements of the temperature and humidity increases in an aircraft exhaust plume, and an observation of contrail formation behind two different four-engine jet aircraft with different engines flying wing by wing. The observations show that an altitude range exists in which the aircraft with high efficiency causes contrails while the other aircraft with lower efficiency causes none. Aircraft with more efficient propulsion cause contrails more frequently. The climatic impact depends on the relative importance of increased contrail frequency and reduced carbon dioxide emissions for increased efficiency, and on other parameters, and has not yet been quantified.
The full text preprint is also available online:
http://core.kmi.open.ac.uk/download/pdf/11094190.pdf

It goes without saying that chemtrailists usually state the exact opposite, namely that modern high bypass jet engine cannot produce contrails at all, with no scientific support whatsoever.
 
It goes without saying that chemtrailists usually state the exact opposite, namely that modern high bypass jet engine cannot produce contrails at all, with no scientific support whatsoever.

Well, people like Russ Tanner say 'scienc-y'- sounding things like that most of the air passing through high bypass engines doesn't 'get combusted' (whatever that means) and then implies that that proves they can't make trails. Russ makes the common claim of having seen "low-altitude-spraying". He also commonly cites the fact that helicopters with jet turbine engines don't leave trails as proof that those engines CAN'T produce trails. It all sounds quite reasonable to people who don't know much on the subject.
 
I listened to a radio blog earlier and one "believer" was denying water is a byproduct of hydrocarbon combustion - everyone knows that! :confused:

You would certainly think so, right??? Sounds eerily like something my boss would say...Then again, he has a single interchangeable phrase for carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide..."carbon myoxide"!!! o_O A favorite is his assertion that "Math is NOT a proven science":eek:... EVERYONE knows these things are true or false, it's basic education, right? Sometimes, in a way, this guy scares the hell out of me.:(

I'm very sorry to go off-topic, I needed to tell this to people who would understand!

Thanks very much,
Don
 
Last edited:
Hi peeps,

I've made a video explaining the basics of chemtrails vs contrails. Anyone wanna check to see if it makes sense?

If you like it, feel free to use it to your advantage :)



Dear Peter,

I just realized in YT that I could insert captions in another language only if your uploaded video is marked with CC (by means of the Video Editor inside YT when you are logged in).
I assume that you are indeed the owner of "Payt Laros" channel.
More info in the YT help page
https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/6054623?hl=en&ref_topic=3029158

Thanks in advance for your cooperation!
 
Dear Peter,

I just realized in YT that I could insert captions in another language only if your uploaded video is marked with CC (by means of the Video Editor inside YT when you are logged in).
I assume that you are indeed the owner of "Payt Laros" channel.
More info in the YT help page
https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/6054623?hl=en&ref_topic=3029158

Thanks in advance for your cooperation!

Hi Cmnit,

I just enabled the subtitles, so if you need more help from me, let me know..
 
Thanks Peter, looks like a non-owner of a video can subtitle it or translate existing ones only for very few selected channels.
I'm transcribing in Italian anyway, when I finish maybe I could upload the txt file with timings and text here for you to actually import it in your video?
 
Thanks Peter, looks like a non-owner of a video can subtitle it or translate existing ones only for very few selected channels.
I'm transcribing in Italian anyway, when I finish maybe I could upload the txt file with timings and text here for you to actually import it in your video?
Sure.. just PM me the text and i'll insert it in the captions bit :)
 
This may not serve as a chemtrail debunking video, but it is just too cool not to have available for reference.



From I Fucking Love Science

External Quote:

Check out this absolutely EXTRAORDINARY time-lapse of Asperatus clouds taken in Lincoln NE, on July 7 2014 by storm-chaser Alex Schueth.

Asperatus clouds are so rare they managed to escape classification until 2009. Ominous and stormy as they appear, these clouds often break up rather quickly, without producing a storm. As with most other undulating cloud types, these clouds are formed when turbulent winds or colliding air masses whip up the bottoms of the cloud layer into fancy shapes and formations. More common in the plains of the United States (try Iowa), asperatus clouds are at their weird and swirly best during the morning or midday hours after a thunderstorm.
 
This may not serve as a chemtrail debunking video...

But, it is an excellent example of refutation when 'some' people claim that cloud names and classifications are "made-up". It is simply an example of our modern ability to video-record (and thus document) fairly rare occurrences in nature. It is the way science 'operates'....new discoveries that are added to the over-all knowledge base.

Slightly OT, but in that vein -- new species of animal (and flora) on this planet are being discovered annually. Thousands. Annually.

And, it's likely going to continue:

http://krisheeter.hubpages.com/hub/...Have-Been-Discovered-in-One-Year-Take-a-Guess

External Quote:
New species continue to be identified each year, but Quentin Wheeler, founding director of the Institute for Species Exploration at Arizona State University, estimates that only two million of an estimated 10 to 12 million living species have been identified to date.
 
I'm looking for a good video where a contrail gap is formed from an initially contiguous contrail. This could be used to refute the notion that photos of contrail gaps are proof of spraying turned on/off. Anyone knows one?
 
I'm looking for a good video where a contrail gap is formed from an initially contiguous contrail. This could be used to refute the notion that photos of contrail gaps are proof of spraying turned on/off. Anyone knows one?

Well, one example is the OP video in familiar to you thread https://www.metabunk.org/threads/de...aircraft-spraying-aerodynamic-contrails.4454/ (there is a longer version inside the thread). Keeping the plane in the frame proves its contrail was "on" all the time, but it would work better if the camera was stationary instead of chasing planes and zooming in and out. I would prefer to use a time lapse movie for this particular task. I have seen quite a few of them showing the gaps forming in initially contiguous contrails but can't find an example for you quickly.

EDIT: Here is an example of such a time lapse movie:
 
Last edited:
I would prefer to use a time lapse movie for this particular task. I have seen quite a few of them showing the gaps forming in initially contiguous contrails but can't find an example for you quickly.

EDIT: Here is an example of such a time lapse movie:
Thank you. The second video is pretty good but it seems to me that the contrail behind the plane after the gap is not persistent. If you find one where both parts are persistent please let me know.
I think such a video would be valuable because it would demonstrate the existence of dry patches in a very clear way.
 
Thank you. The second video is pretty good but it seems to me that the contrail behind the plane after the gap is not persistent. If you find one where both parts are persistent please let me know.
I think such a video would be valuable because it would demonstrate the existence of dry patches in a very clear way.
doesn't dane wigingtons 'undeniable proof' video show just that? we see the constant trails from the plane but the zoom out shows gaps. (at 5 mins) www.youtube.com/watch?v=r93vWqcHWUU
 
I posted one here last year which showed an aircraft flying in broken cloud and the trail starting in the cloud and finishing in the clear air. I will see if I can find it.
 
I posted one here last year which showed an aircraft flying in broken cloud and the trail starting in the cloud and finishing in the clear air. I will see if I can find it.

I have seen countless such examples, too. Of course, finding a particular photo of such an occurrence will NOT change the minds of the ones who are somewhat "religiously" tied to their 'belief system'. (Sorry, but this is the "truth". It is a "belief system" at this point....tantamount to a "religion", for many....who are "in the faith").
 
I have seen countless such examples, too. Of course, finding a particular photo of such an occurrence will NOT change the minds of the ones who are somewhat "religiously" tied to their 'belief system'. (Sorry, but this is the "truth". It is a "belief system" at this point....tantamount to a "religion", for many....who are "in the faith").
You could make this comment to any article or image or video posted here or on contrailscience. There is really no point in making such comments.
 
Thank you. The second video is pretty good but it seems to me that the contrail behind the plane after the gap is not persistent. If you find one where both parts are persistent please let me know.
I think such a video would be valuable because it would demonstrate the existence of dry patches in a very clear way.
How about this:


Just a time lapse sky movie (60x speed). Nothing special, blue sky and clouds, quite a few contrails forming and dissolving again. A couple of contrails (after 1:40 mark) left persistent segments with gaps in them.
 
How about this:
Just a time lapse sky movie (60x speed). Nothing special, blue sky and clouds, quite a few contrails forming and dissolving again. A couple of contrails (after 1:40 mark) left persistent segments with gaps in them.
Pretty good, thanks!
 
Back
Top