Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?

Categories: [ Chemtrails ]

Contrails over London in 1944

Vapour trails left by British bombers on route to attack flying-bomb sites encircle the dome of St. Paul's Cathedral. London, 1944.

All those who passionately believe that "contrails dissipate quickly" whereas "chemtrails linger" and are deeply offended by the sceptical position that TNRA takes in regard to these claims, are free to "unlike" Truth News.

If, on the other hand, you would like to engage in rational debate, you're most welcome to do so.

However, please be advised that the information I have to impart may be shocking and difficult to grasp if you have been a "chemtrail alarmist" for a long time.

The often cited claim that "normal contrails dissipate quickly" is total bunkum.

There is not a shred of science to backup that claim. Nothing, nada, zippo!

Those who promote this idea are simply repeating something they read on a web page without checking sources.

CONTRAIL SCIENCE

For a contrail to form, suitable conditions must occur immediately behind a jet engine in the expanding engine exhaust plume. A contrail will form if, as the exhaust gases cool and mix with surrounding air, the humidity becomes high enough (or, equivalently, the air temperature becomes low enough) for liquid water to condense on particles and form liquid droplets. If the local air is cold enough, these newly formed droplets then freeze and form ice particles that make up a contrail.

Because the basic processes are very well understood, contrail formation for a given aircraft flight can be accurately predicted if atmospheric temperature and humidity conditions are known.

After the initial formation of ice, a contrail evolves in one of two ways. If the humidity is low, the contrail will be short-lived. Newly formed ice particles will quickly evaporate. The resulting contrail will extend only a short distance behind the aircraft. If the humidity is high, the contrail will be persistent. Newly formed ice particles will continue to grow in size by taking water from the surrounding atmosphere. The resulting line-shaped contrail extends for large distances behind an aircraft. Persistent contrails can last for hours while growing to several kilometers in width and 200 to 400 meters in height. Contrails spread because of air turbulence created by the passage of aircraft, differences in wind speed along the flight track, and possibly through effects of solar heating.

Thus, the surrounding atmosphere’s conditions determine to a large extent whether or not a contrail will form after an aircraft’s passage, and how it evolves. Other factors that influence contrail formation include engine fuel efficiency, which affects the amount of heat and water emitted in the exhaust plume.
- source

TNRA is informed by science and is not interested in propping up anyone's belief systems, and we don't apologise for that.

But, please, don't take it from me, speak to any meteorologist or any pilot and they'll tell you straight, that there is HUGE variation in the length and persistence of contrails. Sometimes they don't form at all, other times they form, but disspate quickly, other times they persist and spread out.

That's the facts folks, and it's been that way since planes first went up in the sky.

If you believe otherwise, I'm afraid you've been conned.

Forgive me if I seem rude or impatient on this topic, but every few months I come across a new wave of people who have been subjected to the same false propaganda about chemtrails, and I have to run the same arguments and cite the same articles over and over again. It does wear one's patience down.

Before making some kind of angry reply, I urge you to read this article and associated links. It's fairly detailed, and deals with most of the usual claims made by chemtrail alarmists.

Finally, let me qualify all this by saying that I do not doubt that geo-engineering programs exist, and that, indeed, some of the patented techniques discussed at international forums include the creation of artificial cirrus cloud. Does this, however, entitle you to conclude that every spreading contrail you see is an example of such geo-engineering?

Think about it.

Related Links

Comments

Please review the Terms of Service before reading or responding to comments.

This is the view of Jim Phelps on the credibility of the Deep Shield interviews. Phelps is an eccentric but also someone with inside knowledge.

http://www.holmestead.ca/chemtrails/jimphelps.html

By Wayne Hall on 2012 08 27 - 00:39:09

The book that David Stewart refers to is the Engish edition of Christian Haderer’s book on chemtrails, to which Stewart’s declaration was meant to be an afterword. The Haderer book, however, never found an English publisher.

By Wayne Hall on 2012 08 27 - 00:44:09

Oh, please, stop the bunk already!

Jim Phelps, a genius that nobody seems to know about. As stated on a site:
“The great injustice of it all is that searches of Google Scholar, Google Books, Google News and other news databases don’t reflect Phelps’ obvious eminence. We should unite to correct this grave injustice the man is Edison and Einstein all rolled into one.”

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=17782&#e;ntry227453;
He also seems to claim being the inventor of “chemtrails”.
There is a photo of the man on this page:

http://www.psiram.com/en/index.php/Chemtrail

I suspect he has a tendency toward telling phantastic stories, not unlike A.C. Griffith who passed away recently. The latter’s son stated:

“AC Griffith was my father. His actual name was Arvon Calcote Griffiths. He was not really an expert on any government activities. I find these untrue and intentionally misleading claims to be offensive with his passing. He served in the USAF and worked for the US postal service, not the NSA. It’s a lie. He simply had a way of storytelling that captured the imagination and seemed like he knew everything about the subject. Ask me anything you want to know about his life.”

http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCmfid_qaN6MOvw8vv3UoQCQ

Before anyone asks, this statment has been confirmed:

http://metabunk.org/threads/210-How-did-barium-get-into-chemtrails?p=12330&viewfull=1#post12330

By Josh on 2012 08 27 - 01:44:51

Jim Phelps is a nutcase. But he is our nutcase, and he did work in the nuclear weapons laboratories.

Whose nutcase are you? And who are you?

By Wayne Hall on 2012 08 27 - 02:06:36

The alternative low-key approach, of course, which does not rely on the testimony of nutcase escapees or suicides from the nuclear weapons laboratories, is the ETC Group approach.

They made their debut (as far as the wider public is concerned) at the Copenhagen Summit, and this press conference is revealing, particularly the comments of the member of the audience at the end.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0S8aFi6liz8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9dQYj_Iq-6U&feature=relmfu

By Wayne Hall on 2012 08 27 - 02:24:46

Wayne Hall said:

“[Jim Phelps] did work in the nuclear weapons laboratories.”

How do you know? Because he said so? Any confirmation?

I’m a debunker and you are a “chemtrail” proponent who refuses to discuss the plausibility of “chemtrails”.

To be honest, I don’t care about you as a person and neither should you about me. It’s just a distraction. Stick with the facts.

I assume you do your posting “work” with something resembling passion.
Well, so do I, as stated before.

By Josh on 2012 08 27 - 02:32:26

Tou are a third-rate debunker. Not a patch on some I have had the displeasure of encountering.

Exercise your debunking on some of the questions I have asked you which you have avoided answering. I have explained exactly why I refuse to answer those of your questions I refuse to answer.

Jim Phelps is neither here nor there. I believe he worked in nuclear weapons laboratories because he evidently has relevant knowledge. He also obviously has certain idees fixes, like you. He is not a person one can discuss anything with.

Why does 911 Truth Oz not exclude a self-confessed debunker from its forum? The only effect of your presence is to discourage others from posting. They don’t want to condcut with you the only argument you know how to pursue.

You deprive others of their “right to freedom of speech”.

I would not post in the aggressive way I do if you were not here.

By Wayne Hall on 2012 08 27 - 03:11:49

Consciousness Beyond Chemtrails
http://www.enouranois.gr/english/ekdilosisenglish/indexenglish.htm

By Wayne Hall on 2012 08 27 - 13:11:58

Wayne Hall said:

“Why does 911 Truth Oz not exclude a self-confessed debunker from its forum?”

I can see this would be comforting for you ...

As to the “why”, the topic of this blog post may give you a hint. It is a debunking of the assumption that normal contrails do not persist (“everything that does not evaporate within minutes must be a chemtrail”).

It was not me who started the debunking here. So I figure all your “ad hominem” posts will likely have no effect.

By Josh on 2012 08 27 - 23:39:55

Wayne Hall also said:

“You deprive others of their ‘right to freedom of speech’”.

This is so absurd that it doesn’t even need commenting.

If you want me to stop my evil posting, simply stop posting bunk.

Speaking of bunk - again - what are your thoughts regarding Laura Eisenhower’s talk? Would you say she is also one of “your nutcases”?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0LdvLMKc71w

She actually believes into the reptilian overlords. And she was recruited to go to Mars.

By Josh on 2012 08 28 - 00:01:50

To be a “debunker” is equivalent to being a party politician. It has nothing to do with deliberative democracy.

Conferences like “Consciousness beyond Chemtrails”, which are obliged to be self-financing, because no monied interests are willing to touch them, or help them, may compromise in some way for financial reasons. Getting a “name” like Eisenhower or getting a nutcase who will typically find it easier to get financial backing, is what they do, and what is done, and what I myself would do if I were trying to organize such a conference and couldn’t find a better solution.

If you get one or two nuts on the programme, you can then project them in the mainstream media as being what the conference is all about: http://www.dailynews.com/ci_21344909/believers-chemtrails-gather-at-l-conference

That is a motivation for hostile interests to provide money to certain participants.

Clowns often have more money, and often a following, while top-rate journalists such as Rady Ananda have their backs to the wall financially and may have to stop what they are doing. At least that is the impression I get. I hope I am wrong.

I am not deprived of my “right of free speech” by the presence of a debunker, or even a number of debunkers, but there are many many people (people like the Rady Ananda I mentioned) who think that it is demeaning and intellectually debilitating become involved situations like the situation here and do not respect one more for doing it.

That is the extent to which, and the way in which, debunking can deprive others of “the right of free speech”.

By Wayne Hall on 2012 08 28 - 02:34:27

Wayne Hall said:

“To be a ‘debunker’ is equivalent to being a party politician. It has nothing to do with deliberative democracy.”

I’m not sure if this statement makes any sense. Anyway, again you go ‘ad hominem’.

“There are many many people [...] who think that it is demeaning and intellectually debilitating become involved situations like the situation here and do not respect one more for doing it.”

Again, not making too much sense. What are “situations like the situation here”?

Situations in which conspiracy believers are confronted with opposing points of view, without being able to ban and purge?

Situations in which a participant is insulted when bringing up factual arguments?

Intellectually debilitating? Oh, come ON!

By Josh on 2012 08 28 - 02:56:13

Aren’t you getting a bit tired of being in reactive mode?

Should I post something else so that you can react to it?

By Wayne Hall on 2012 08 28 - 03:08:29

Wayne Hall said:
“Aren’t you getting a bit tired of being in reactive mode?”

Well, I could post random links to debunking sites in the way you do in your “proactive mode”.

Or we could discuss the topic of the blog article: if it is normal for contrails to persist - how can chemtrailers tell a contrail apart from a “chemtrail”?

Anytime you want. Until that moment, I am quite content with reacting. If you stop posting, I will stop replying.

By Josh on 2012 08 28 - 03:36:18

I will give you ten days for you to see if anyone is interested in talking to you about “whether it is normal for contrails to persist”.

I am not. If anyone else is, let them do so.

By Wayne Hall on 2012 08 28 - 04:02:56

Wayne Hall,

you don’t have to “give me” anything. I have explained my point of view regarding persistent contrails on the very first page of comments here.

Maybe these explanations will suffice for most readers. Anyway, I’m not particularly eager to repeat myself over and over again.

So I’m fine with letting this thread rest if there are no more posts.

By Josh on 2012 08 28 - 04:14:24

I am also willing to discuss here the more important subject of chemtrails, geoengineering, weather and climate modification and HAARP if anyone wants to.

But I will not post again until ten days have passed and it has been established that there is no interest in discussing what you want to discuss.

Then I will make one exploratory post and we will see if all interest in discussion here has died.

By Wayne Hall on 2012 08 28 - 04:29:17

OK. Ten days are up. It has been established that nobody is interested in arguing forever about whether the things that people everwhere all the time see in the sky should be called contrails or chemtrails.

Are people here interested in discussing chemtrails/climate modification/HAARP?

Well, here is a link to an ongoing discussion:
https://chemtrailsnorthnz.wordpress.com/2012/09/04/activists-message-to-top-geo-engineer-ken-caldeira-his-reply/#comment-11392

There is also a good recent petition that came out in France. I will put it up also if people want to see it.

By Wayne Hall on 2012 09 06 - 22:17:14

Wayne Hall,

I wonder if you noticed that nobody was interested in discussing your issues either ... but here we go again.

About the link you posted, I am not sure if it demands any comment. The letters to the scientist are so deeply embarrassing that I can only commend him for his self-restraint.

Are you able to think yourself into the position of a serious scientist and receiving letters like this?

Oh, and “ceterum censeo”:

There is no evidence that the white trails in the sky are anything other than contrails (freezing water from the engine exhaust and from the environment).

By Josh on 2012 09 06 - 23:23:48

I don’t know. This thread is listed as the most popular at the forum. If that is the case there must to be a lot of lurkers who are either intimidated, disapproving or for some other reason disinclined to join in.

If any of them want to explain themselves, I guess they will.

I made a contribution to the discussion at that New Zealand forum, which is still awaiting moderation there, so here it is here:

People shouldn’t talk to Caldeira and company at all. The geoengineering advocates should be boycotted and ostracised. There is no need to discuss geoengineering with anyone less opposed to it than, e.g. the ETC group, who also fudge some aspects but at least are opposed. Talking to Caldeira from climate change sceptic positions is not only strategically wrong but also intellectually ill-conceived.

Here is something I wrote recently:

“The main problem, or at least a very important problem, is that climate change skeptics and proponents of geoengineering do not talk to each other, or at least do not talk to each other about geoengineering. They may argue with each other about global warming. But in general both of them channel their separate and conflicting messages to the public, playing to the aisles and thus “dividing and ruling”. A climate change skeptic such as John Christy can say with a straight face ” I don’t think geoengineering will happen. It is too expensive and too uncertain in its results (who would be liable when/if something goes wrong?”). Conversely, a geoengineer such as Paul Crutzen will say that it is because of the attitudes of people like Christy (specifically his climate change scepticism) that Crutzen has to make his “proposals” for spraying sulphur in the stratosphere.

But have you ever seen these two guys talking to EACH OTHER in the media or in public about GEOENGINEERING? No. They will be got arguing about climate change. The subject in general is a red herring. Remember that Teller, who perhaps did more than anyone else to promote “solar radiation management”, was a climate change sceptic.

Climate change scepticism and acceptance of geoengineering have both been gaining ground since the Copenhagen Summit. Dane Wigington, one of the minority of chemtrails activists who are not climate change sceptics, says: “There will not be any climate change skeptics for much longer. The planet is in full blown meltdown and the geoengineers are fueling the fire.”

But this is a misjudgement in my opinion. There is no direct link between what is happening in this world and what people talk about. The worse the situation of the planet becomes, the more people will devote themselves to the mainstream climate change debate and avoid talking about geoengineering and/or chemtrails. It is rather like the raging brawls between the Blues and the Greens, the circus factions in Constantinople, over the nature of Christ.

The Manhattan Project marks the beginning of the irredeemable politicisation of science: weather modification projects came out of the same nuclear weapons laboratories and there is political continuity. It is much more important to investigate the politics of the climate change discussion than to take sides in the politicized “scientific” debate.”

By Wayne Hall on 2012 09 07 - 09:57:11

Page 17 of 55 pages ‹ First < 15 16 17 18 19 > Last ›

RECLAIM AUSTRALIA IS DOOMED

Although I agree with many of their ideas, the forces reigned against RAM are too great, violent, statist and reactionary for them to remain a non-political, broad based, multi-ethnic, community protest group for much longer. The Left and their Antifa nihilist fellow travelers are already pushing them towards the extreme Right, by calling them racists and Islamophobes and so on. Whilst the extreme Right have aligned themselves with RAM. With fascists of the Left and Right pressuring them they will not be able to remain beyond the Left-Right divide and will inevitably move to the Right - the extreme Right. Which is already happening. A development which will alienate decent Australians of all ethnic backgrounds many of whom currently support them.

The RAM leadership have already established open alliances with the Patriotic Front (the ape in the photograph is a Patriot Front supporter at a recent Richmond demonstration) Australia First and Golden Dawn, a Greek neo-Nazi party. Members of these collectivist groups are currently attending RAM demonstrations all over Australia.

There is a real need in Australia to establish a political movement beyond the Left-Right divide and their vested interests, a movement that questions the current direction Australia is heading i.e. the direction the Left/Right and their extremes would like to take it; that questions the efficacy of state sponsored multiculturalism, as opposed to a proper, non-discriminatory immigration policy; that questions the validity of political correctness; that is politically neutral, anti-war and pro environment; that is opposed to all collectivists ideologies (fascisms of the Left and Right); that would dismantle the power pyramids of corporations and banks and their ability to impact on government; that would dissolve all anti-terror laws and all laws that impose on the rights and freedom of the individual and the people.

(The ape in the photograph is a Patriot Front supporter at a recent Richmond demonstration)

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/reclaim-australia-rally-set-for-sydney-on-sunday-20150718-gifb9s.html

http://australiafirstparty.net/news/reclaiming-australia-queensland-senate-campaign/

By Eugene Donnini on 2015 07 26 - 15:36:56
From the entry 'Dylann Roof: soldier in a new race war or just a pawn in the game?'.

Hello there I am so thrilled I found your web site, I really found you by error, while I was searching on Digg for something else, Anyways I am here now and would just like to say thanks for a incredible post and a all round thrilling blog (I also love the theme/design), I don韙 have time to go through it all at the minute but I have bookmarked it and also included your RSS feeds, so when I have time I will be back to read a lot more, Please do keep up the great work.

By Prova a Adidas Neutro Originals Nizza Nero Giallo on 2015 07 20 - 08:41:30
From the entry 'Statism, the greater good and the big lie'.

I second Keith’s assertion that Mike Holt from Restore Australia is very much a fake. He bangs on about Halaal being a scam and money maker for Islam (and no I don’t support Halaal whatsoever), but makes excuses for its counterpart Kosher as being a somehow legitimate. Double standards? When I confronted him about this fact he went off on a convoluted tirade about Israel being some sort of “Bastion of Democracy” in the middle east…Really!, I will leave that one up to the readers to decide on. I found that MH came across as disingenuous to say the least.

By Citizen Scorn on 2015 07 19 - 07:33:43
From the entry 'Restore Australia!'.

Without doubt, TNR is one of the best, if not the best alternative news source on the net. Which doesn’t mean Herewood is always right. His job, I believe, is to present the facts as he sees them as an objectively as possible, without fear or favor. For this, he has my respect and support. But I believe he needs to be careful and to think a little deeper about the problems of “racism,” in Australia. He has labelled the Reclaim Australia Movement as racist. I’m wondering if his objectivity is a little weak on this point, a little without foundation.

Of course all political movements have its fringe groups and individuals. We make a distinction between, for example, a Muslim and a fundamentalist Muslim (Islamist), and by so doing we don’t claim that all Muslims are blood thirsty fanatics. If its good for the Muslims, then its good for RAM, which is bound to attract a few lunatics and real racists. But to brand the entire movement as “racist” is wrong; it is the same ploy that is used by the mainstream media and its left-wing, establishment Marxist boot boys.

One of the first things I noticed when i attended a RAM rally recently were the amount of non-white people in attendance, including Aboriginals. In fact the main banner of RAM contains an Australian flag and an Aboriginal flag. Speakers at their rallies have included Jews, Arabs, Indians, Aboriginals, Chinese and so on. What does this tell you? Is this really a fascist-Nazi-racist movement whose stated aim are the eradication and exclusion of other cultures, in place of some sort of Aussie white Reich, or is this just propaganda that is being propagated by the left for their own political interests. Consequently, we all know where the culmination of their politics have led, historically speaking, which are to the imposition of terror and dictatorships.

We can be thankful for small mercies, in terms of the Left, which today mostly tends to attract collectivists, establishmentarians and the privileged sons and daughters of the upper bourgeoisie, who seems to share one thing in common, nativity….

By Eugene on 2015 07 18 - 16:03:54
From the entry 'Dylann Roof: soldier in a new race war or just a pawn in the game?'.

Mike Holt from Restore Australia is very much a fake. He hasn’t even been citizen for but a few years. But, he makes out like he was born there. ALSO - this guy spent 30 years in Thailand working shady businesses. I would wager that his primary purpose in being an activist is that he wants to make money off selling merchandise.

By Keith on 2015 07 17 - 20:51:15
From the entry 'Restore Australia!'.

good to see you putting out some new shows heraward

freely the banana girl is to a certain extent a troll, as is her boyfriend durian rider. they have been trolling the fitness community on youtube for some time… and yes they are extreme but they are also trolls. They use their trolling to spread their message. currently, another dude called vegangains is trolling the fitness community as well.

i am a vegetarian, and it was seeing this documentary on the pork industry that started me on the vegetarian path. for anyone interested, its pretty off the charts disturbing and its australian as well. its pretty much made by dudes breaking into pork farms and filming what they find

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KArL5YjaL5U

Would the world be better if people cared where their food came from? probably, they might then care about other things too

do you become a better person if you dont eat meat? i feel like a better person mainly because animals aren’t being hurt because of me. i dont feel humans have to eat meat really… or at least not much. How can you watch that documentary on pork, know that that is pretty much whats going on and turn a blind eye to it? I think its basic empathy and just saying well ‘i like bacon so yeah’ is in my opinion wrong and i can see freleys point of view to an extent. In my opinion, at least these people believe in something. i see my money as my vote, henceforth im ethical as to what i do with it. free range eggs became mainstream for exactly this reason… although im pretty sure woolies and coles lobbied the state to change the definition of the word ‘free range’ at some point. I dont eat beef because the amount of resources that go into growing a cow are pretty crazy. Think about how much grass that cow needs to eat before it is harvested and how much space it requires. think of how many vegies you could grow in the same space with the same amount of water. lamb? comon, think about what your doing here… but that being said i think most vegans are total loons. People like freeley should be advocating for the destruction of lions and tigers, as lions and tigers murder other animals in truly horrific style. if we humans are smart enough to not harm animals, then we should be stopping the animals that harm other animals from existing. Freeley also kills birds when she flies in aeroplanes so she is a hypocrite.

feminism is one of the biggest problems in society today and although there is some valid historical basis to it, the liberation of the human female from their biology is in my opinion largely a product of the technological advance of humans. sufferagettes where never machine gunned on the streets, unlike the men that where drafted and sent off to war to die just a few years earlier. as technology has advanced, women have advanced as well, however now its going way too far and is pretty blatantly anti male in many respects. i view feminism in its modern context as a tool of the social marxists that really isnt doing society a great deal of good at this time. its screwing up gender dynamics and is wrecking women and men for each other. i see it as low frequency, lowest common denominator idiocy, just like a lot of the the race baiting ‘is this racist’ stuff getting around that is being perpetuated pretty much as a distraction, divide and conquer strategy by the power elite. idiots love this kind of bicker and beef… it would be funny if it wasn’t so serious

anyway

I agree with steven friar. gods a maniac

good show… keep making them

By r0Kb3B0p on 2015 07 14 - 21:05:32
From the entry 'Addictions, obsessions, fanaticisms and distractions'.

Really truthfull.

By OZE on 2015 07 07 - 16:56:36
From the entry 'Defending your personal health choices'.

Yeah sure authority aware.

By OZE on 2015 07 07 - 16:28:55
From the entry 'What is the future of Australia?'.

Stay tuned for more rules here as usually is the case!!!

By OZE on 2015 07 07 - 16:21:50
From the entry 'Mass media disinformation and brainwashing dissected'.

Almost two months since the last broadcast! How the hell can you expect people to donate when you don’t broadcast? Looks like the ship of truth has sprung a leak. This broadcast has been part of my life almost since its inception…it is one of the few alternative news sources that hasn’t gone off the deep end, by dilution credible information with crap e.g. Fairdinkum Radio and Info Wars…Pittard started FR with some incredibly interesting material, but then he flipped…Today he sounds like a fundamentalist preacher, the Christian equivalent to a Fanatical Islamist. As an atheist, I think he’s really ###### up a potentially good show. As for Info Wars, all they would have to do to improve is dump Alex Jones, what a shit-for-brains. I reckon Jones and Pittard are allowed to proliferate, because they’re so stupid and harmless. I suppose they have some entertainment value, and along with David Icke are living examples of how low the alternative media has sunk. Truth News Radio is, or should I say was, way ahead of them all ahead of them all in terms of credibility How sad that its come to this.

By Eugene on 2015 06 28 - 17:28:56
From the entry 'Introducing Internet.org: Mark Zuckerberg's free 'private' internet which will soon be rolled out to 4 billion+ people'.

Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?

Comments

Recent Comments

Archives

Categories