Dissecting a debunking article written by Jay Reynold

The article can be read here: Earth Island Journal > Issues > Winter 2003 > Voices > The Other Side of ‘Chemtrails’

The article begin with sentence: "The article Stolen Skies: The Chemtrail Mystery (EIJ, Summer 2002), contained many inaccuracies which deserve correction."

The article trying to explain the error scientifically. Unfortunately, while the article may look scientific, but it is not scientifically correct. The explanation also do not any quote from scientific literature too, a common custom for a proper scientific article.

Let start with how the writer describe the formation of contrails:
"Contrails form when hydrocarbon fuel is burned and combines with oxygen. Hydrogen from the fuel, plus oxygen, yields water, which freezes quickly into ice crystals. If temperatures are above minus 40°F, it is unlikely that a contrail will form. If cold enough, the ice crystals forming the contrail will behave just as any other cloud. If enough moisture is already present in the air, the contrail can spread by growth of the crystals, or be blown into normal-looking cirrus clouds. If the air is too dry, the contrail will eventually dissipate, either rapidly or up to several hours later."

Let us look at how scientific article describe the formation of contrails:
Ground-based observations for the validation of contrails and cirrus detection in satellite imagery
"Aircrafts add warm and humid exhaust air to the tropopause region. When the plume consisting of exhaust and entrained air cools, its relative humidity increases. If the ambient air is cold and moist enough, saturation with respect to liquid water is eventually reached. Soot particles from the combustion process and other condensation nuclei then start to accumulate water vapour and grow to little droplets which immediately freeze: the contrail is formed. The temperature and moisture limits are given by the Schmidt-Appleman Criterion (Schmidt, 1941; Appleman, 1953; Schumann, 1996). In warmer and moist surroundings contrails can also be initiated aerodynamically (Gierens et al., 2009; Kärcher et al., 2009). If the ambient air is supersaturated with respect to ice, the contrail can persist for several hours."

We see the word particles in there. Let see another scientific articles:

LEOTC Project, Minister of Education, the Royal Society of New Zealand, The Kiwi Kids Cloud Identification Guide
"Contrails are formed when particles from aircraft jet engines mix with the water vapour in the air. The water vapour condenses and freezes around the particles causing long white trails across the sky."

Again the word particle is mentioned.  This is because the particle is the neccessary thing for contrails to form or more importantly to persist.



The debunking article also make another claim about modern engine being cleaner:
" Ironically, technical advances in engine efficiency have resulted in jet engines that burn fuel more completely, thus combining more hydrogen with oxygen and yielding more water for contrail formation. Better engines also have resulted in cooler exhaust temperatures, making it easier for the contrails to form. The prospect of a hydrogen-fueled jet which might be squeaky clean but leaves a massive contrail of water vapor would be sure to raise aesthetic questions.

  Jet aircraft do leave behind unseen carbon dioxide and oxides of sulfur and nitrogen. These emissions have similar consequences to other fossil fuel use. Aviation produces a relatively small amount of these pollutants (13 percent) compared to other transportation and a fraction of the global emissions (2 percent). Modern jet engines are among the most efficient of all internal combustion engines."

However, study show that modern engine require fuel with more sulfur content, which results in more particle production from the exhaust which cause more trails.
Airliners.net >> Aviation Articles >> Contrails: What’s Left Behind Is Bad News
"Tests were performed with a NASA jet aircraft examining the effect of sulfur levels in jet fuel exhaust. During the airborne test one engine was run on normal jet fuel and the other engine was run on fuel that emitted exhaust with a lower sulfur content. The high sulfur engine, representing most jet engines on modern commercial aircraft, produced a contrail that lasted through a larger range of temperatures and formed faster out of the engine. The low sulfur engine did the opposite.

The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 was the aforementioned event, and it was likely to have excited meteorological researchers involved in contrail impact studies. The national airspace was shut down for three days, something that had not yet occurred since the jet age began in the 1960s and is not likely to occur ever again. Scientists took advantage of this unique three day period in history that lacked contrails. What they learned was shocking and is enough evidence to effectively silence any counterargument to their case. One measure of climate is the average daily temperature range (DTR). For thirty years this had been recorded and extra cirrus clouds in the atmosphere would reduce this range by trapping heat. "September 11 - 14, 2001 had the biggest diurnal temperature range of any three-day period in the past 30 years," said Andrew M. Carleton1. Not in three decades had there been such a large temperature spread between the daytime highs and the nighttime lows. Furthermore, the increase in DTR during those three days was more than double the national average for regions of the United States where contrail coverage was previously known to be most abundant, such as the Midwest, northeast, and northwest regions. The specific increase in the range was 2°F, which in three days was twice the amount the average temperature had increased by over thirty years time1. This is evidence that contrails do alter the climate of the land they drift above."


 The debunking article also contain an interesting statement:

"Active since 1997, the "chemtrails" hoax came to prominence during 1999 as millennium fears increased and originally focused on claims of poison chemicals designed to kill. Those dire predictions have not come to fruition. Later claims have focused on the idea that "chemtrails" are a form of amelioration of global warming. In fact, such geoengineering proposals have been made by prominent scientists, but assume that aerosols for blocking sunlight would be emitted high into the stratosphere, far higher than the contrails observed in the upper troposphere."

Some interesting point:

1. Chemtrails said to be active since 1997. From what I remember, this is the start of global warming program, carbon cut, etc.

2. Jay Reynold claim chemtrails are not an amelioration of global warming, he claim that it is a geoengineering  proposal to cool the earth. Interestingly at 2010, there is a very popular video, What In The World Are They Spraying, also popular as WITWATS, that tell people that those trails are actually geoengineering, an effort to cool the earth. In the succesive year, the producer of that film, Dane Wigington, talk in various show and article telling people that the real issue is global warming and those trails is an effort to cool the earth, to prevent runaway melting scenari, to slow down imminent planet meltdown.

It is scary that WITWATS looks like an implementation of Jay Reynolds idea. Jay Reynold is a known chemtrails debunker. The article seems to be written at winter 2003.

NASA's claim actually support the chemtrails believer.
http://mynasadata.larc.nasa.gov/804-2/contrail-studies/
Scientists at NASA's Langley Research Center in Hampton, Virginia found that the increase in temperature over the United States from 1975 to 1994 closely matched the increase expected from the presence of contrails. Dr. Patrick Minnis is a senior research scientist at the Langley Research Center. He has measured a one percent per decade increase in cirrus cloud cover over the United States, which is likely due to contrails. Minnis estimates that cirrus clouds from contrails increased the temperatures of the lower atmosphere by anywhere from 0.36 to 0.54 degrees F per decade. Minnis's results show good agreement with weather service data, which reveal that the temperature of the surface and lower atmosphere rose by almost 0.5 degrees F per decade between 1975 and 1994.

If we look at the science, scientist do worry about contrails. The increase of concern about contrails bad influence on the atmosphere results in this article:
Gaseous and Particulate Emissions with Jet Engine Exhaust and Atmospheric Pollution
"Thus, the emissions of sulfate aerosol particles by aircrafts can significantly influence on the surface area of stratospheric aerosol layer and as a result on the radiative forcing as well as on the total ozone concentration. This exhibits the necessity of reasonable limitation on sulfate aerosol particles emitted. For modern aviation fuels the typical value of FSC does not exceed 400 ìg or 0.04%. Therefore, we can suggest for prospective jet engines the limitation standard for sulfate aerosol particle emission index of (1-2).1016 kg-1. "

NASA even ask people to observe contrails. Which was explained in previous article:

Nasa said: Look up!

Scientist also claim that those contrails is actually heating the earth:
Trails heating property disinformation that chemtrails expert often agree to

There is video which show that the temperature reading of contrails is higher than normal clouds or clear sky:
Infra red thermal reading shows that trails heat the earth!

This article give me more confidence that there is a scenario to try to make chemtrails as something good, as a geoengineering to cool the earth, when actually chemtrails is an effort to produce global warming.

Correcting the contrails science in debate between Mick West and Dane Wigington

Chemtrails Debate between Mick West and Dane Wigington make me learn that both Dane Wigington and Mick West still do not use science when they explain contrails. They both use logic instead of reference.

The part of the debate that show this is:

Dane: what is necessary for that cloud to form though Mick? Particulate matter. Right?
Mick: Yes particulate matter, but ...

Dane: ... it can't form without particulate matter can it?

 Mick: ... the air is full of particulate matter. Everywhere, even in the clouds or not in the clouds, there's particulate matter everywhere, there's no shortage of particulate matter. The stuff that comes out of the black of the plane helps the contrails to form a little bit, but if it was perfectly clean, if it was just spraying water out of the back of the plane, you'd still get a contrail, because there's particulates in the atmosphere.

But the point we were talking about here is that there's a gap in a contrail, now, all the contrail is doing is revealing where in the sky the areas of humidity are. So if there are area of humidity that are shaped like clouds, which have very sharp edges, you've see cumulus clouds with incredibly sharp edges, why wouldn't a trail flying, a plane flying through area of humidity start and stop at exactly where those boundaries are? If it was flying through...

Dane: ... the turbulence alone around a passing aircraft could never make possible what you describe, it is absolutely impossible. And if you describe, what you described is true Mick, then how come as the same time we see an aircraft leaving a trail from horizon to horizon, we can spot, and we have on film, aircrafts flying at the same approximate altitude, leaving virtually nothing. Why is that? How is that explained?

Mick: because, it's the same approximate altitude, it only takes a few hundred feet in difference for you to be in a different layer of the atmosphere. And it can be very different humidity. There have been tests done in Germany where they have two planes flying side by side. One of them leaves a trail, and the other one doesn't leave a tail, because they have slightly different engines.

There are two point:
1. Mick West claim that: " The stuff that comes out of the black of the plane helps the contrails to form a little bit, but if it was perfectly clean, if it was just spraying water out of the back of the plane, you'd still get a contrail, because there's particulates in the atmosphere"

2. Mick West claim that: " There have been tests done in Germany where they have two planes flying side by side. One of them leaves a trail, and the other one doesn't leave a tail, because they have slightly different engines"


1st claim clearly wrong. The particulate exist because of jet plane and more particulate in fuel clearly change the behaviour of contrails.
CONTRAIL AND CIRRUS CLOUD AVOIDANCE , Frank Noppel, Riti Singh - Cranfield University, Bedfordshire, United Kingdom, - Mark Taylor - Rolls-Royce plc, Derby, United Kingdom.

Aviation has been identified as contributor to anthropogenic changes in the Earth’s radiation budget. In particular this is due to the emission of greenhouse gases, soot, aerosols, and the formation of contrails and aviation induced cirrus clouds. Linear persistent contrails occur in an ice supersaturated atmosphere if the Schmidt Appelman criterion is satisfied (1). Cirrus clouds can evolve from spreading persistent contrails known as primary cirrus or contrail cirrus (2). Secondary cirrus occur due to locally increased soot and aerosol concentration, which might lead to theformation of cirrus clouds that would not form in the absence of air traffic (3; 4; 5). An indirect climate forcing of aircraft emissions is possible by changing particle size and ice particle number density of natural cirrus clouds (6).
Aviation induced pollutants have been identified and assessed in terms of radiative forcing by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Radiative forcing is a metric where the expected steady state equilibrium change in terms of global mean surface temperature is related linearly to the observed radiative forcing of a certain perturbation. Linear persistent contrails and aviation induced cirrus clouds were identified as main contributors to the overall aviation induced radiative forcing. It is estimated that linear persistent contrails contribute approximately 20% to the total aviation induced radiative forcing (7). This estimate considers a year 2000 scenario where cirrus clouds are excluded. Aviation induced cirrus clouds have the potential to cause a radiative forcing which exceeds the radiative forcing of all other emissions due to air traffic combined. Annually and globally averaged total contrail cover and the associated radiative forcing is expected to quadruple during the next decades due to the increase in air traffic (8).
Depending on the allocated importance of the radiative forcing due to persistent contrails and cirrus clouds relative to that of other aircraft emissions, it might occur that the avoidance of persistent contrails and cirrus clouds becomes the most important and pressing issue to be addressed in the future.

The article mention that the increase of particle in atmosphere happen because of air travel. Also read the two next reference too. If different sulfur content in the fuel can produce different trails results, then the effect of existing particle in the atmosphere should be small compared to the effect of particle from the exhaust. The correct claim would be: "The stuff that comes out of the back of the plane helps the contrails to form a lot"
Also
Emissions trading in international civil aviation by Öko-Institut e.V. Institute for Applied Ecology

As a result of aviation, emissions are expelled into the global atmosphere that contribute to climate change and the destruction of the ozone layer. Emissions and expelled particulates alter the concentration of greenhouse gases – carbon dioxide (CO2), ozone (O3) and methane (CH4). They also trigger off the formation of contrails and can encourage the occurrence of cirrus clouds. All of this contributes to climate change (IPCC 1999).

2nd claim may be correct, but different sulfur / particle content can cause such difference too, this also deny the 1st claim:
Contrails: What’s Left Behind Is Bad News, By Nick Onkow, March 4, 2006

There are several methods that can be explored that will help reduce the role that contrails play in global warming. The easiest way to avoid this global warming through contrail cirrus clouds is to have jets fly at different altitudes. Flying higher than the typical 30,000 to 40,000 feet would usually stop contrails from forming, as would flying lower. another option might be to increase the emission standards of jet engines and with that only insure airplanes with the newer, cleaner engines. Tests were performed with a NASA jet aircraft examining the effect of sulfur levels in jet fuel exhaust. During the airborne test one engine was run on normal jet fuel and the other engine was run on fuel that emitted exhaust with a lower sulfur content. The high sulfur engine, representing most jet engines on modern commercial aircraft, produced a contrail that lasted through a larger range of temperatures and formed faster out of the engine. The low sulfur engine did the opposite. This condensation nuclei is the tiny matter that gives water vapor the ability to form. The International Civil Aviation Organization is in favor of making polluting, obsolete aircraft uninsurable. While this option would not completely eliminate contrails, it would narrow the window of conditions needed to form them, making them less common.”

I wish both Dane Wigington and Mick West can use reference from scientific community. Especially because both have many follower.

Another example of Facebook chemtrails denier, claim to be PhD in science, but have wrong understanding of contrails.

This happen in Facebook , alternate link

Aji Condro
Most chemtrails denier are scientifically illiterate too. Or simply deny science.
Edited · Like · 2 · Edit · Saturday at 10:21am

Neil Penn
I have a B.Sc. in physics, a B.Math(Hons) and currently have my PhD in physics out for external examination (all degrees earned at the University of Newcastle, NSW, Australia). I have conducted $450,000 of industry funded research in the last 10 years and have owned my own scientific consultancy for 12 years.

I consider myself very highly literate in my own field of science and sufficiently literate in atmospheric physics to assure you that it is easily demonstrable that chemtrails are physically impossible.
Like · 1 · Saturday at 2:00pm


Aji Condro
Then Neil Penn, can you explain about what is contrails? Most simply explain wrong or out of date. Why being a PhD in physics make you know contrails? What is your source book for contrails, and can you take photo of the page explaining contrails?
Like · 1 · Edit · Saturday at 5:26pm


Neil Penn
Contrails are just a natural consequence of injecting a stream of water vapour into air below -40C that is high enough in humidity that the ice crystals don't sublimate. I have many papers on this subject in my archives but it's not possible to post them here. There are text books on clouds that date back to the 1940's which discuss persistent contrails. Thanks you for taking my comment seriously, it shows that you have an inquiring mind.
Like · 1 · Saturday at 6:15pm


Aji Condro
See? You have wrong understanding for contrails. Sorry, but the science today do not describe contrails that way.

If you know the science of contrails, you would surely mention the importance of particle in contrails creation.

Example:
LEOTC Project, Minister of Education, the Royal Society of New Zealand, The Kiwi Kids Cloud Identification Guide
http://science-edu.larc.nasa.gov/SCOOL/pdf/Kiwi_Kids_Cloud_Guide.pdf
"Contrails are formed when particles from aircraft jet engines mix with the water vapour in the air. The water vapour condenses and freezes around the particles causing long white trails across the sky."

http://science-edu.larc.nasa.gov/contrail-edu/science.html
"Contrails are clouds formed when water vapor condenses and freezes around small particles (aerosols) that exist in aircraft exhaust. Some of that water vapor comes from the air around the plane; and, some is added by the exhaust of the aircraft.
The exhaust of an aircraft contains both gas (vapor) and solid particles. Both of these are important in the formation of contrails. Some elements of the exhaust gasses are not involved in contrail formation but do constitute air pollution. Emissions include carbon dioxide, water vapor, nitrogen oxides (NOx), carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons such as methane, sulfates (SOx), and soot and metal particles."
Like · 1 · Edit · 1 hour ago

Neil Penn
Correct. Jet exhaust is predominantly CO2 and water vapour with traces of combustion by-products that can act as condensation nuclei. I didn't think you were asking for the contents of jet exhaust, I thought you were inquiring into PERSISTENCE of contrails and this is unrelated to the nature of the condensation nucleii. My apologies for misinterpreting your imperfect English. Do you believe that persistent contrails are something other than the normal products of jet fuel combustion, or do you just use the word "chemtrail" to describe a persistent contrail?
Edited · Like · 1 hour ago

Aji Condro
Do you have source for this claim bellow?
" I thought you were inquiring into PERSISTENCE of contrails and this is unrelated to the nature of the condensation nucleii"

Are you saying that the amount of particle have no relationship with contrails thickness / visibility / persistence?
Like · Edit · 56 minutes ago


Neil Penn
No / no / yes.
Like · 54 minutes ago

Aji Condro
If you do not have source for such claim, how did you know?.

What do you know about the scientist opinion about contrails? would they care, do not care or very worry about contrails?

The amount of particle have high influence on contrails behaviour.
http://books.google.co.id/books?id=NtoEz62LlAQC&pg=PA296&lpg=PA296&dq=%22completely+eliminate+sulfur%22+contrails+jet+exhaust&source=bl&ots=dgyVjyuAkH&sig=wEbsAkklSLnfpz6X4lN9Wv2goOA&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Y8EIUYfTDo7LrQeR7YD4Ag&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=fals
Particle formation in jet aircraft exhaust and contrails for different sulfur containing fuels

"Abstract: - A series of experiments has been performed observing contrails formation of twin-angine jet aircraft (ATTAS-VFW 614 and Airbus A310-300) run with different sulfur containing fuels on the two engines at the same time. The fuel sulfur mass content was varied from 2 to 5500 ppm. The results suggest that contrails particles form mainly from soot particles. The higher the sulfur content the more the soot particles get activated as condensation neclei. Particles start condensing in the liquid phase but have to freeze quickly, and the water vapor mass accomodation coefficient must be larger than about 0.2 both for liquid and ice particles, in order to form a visible contrails within 25 m after the aircraft as observed."

Nucleation and Atmospheric Aerosols 1996
books.google.co.id
Like · Edit · 48 minutes ago

Aji Condro
Not posting source is the common behaviour of chemtrails denier too.
Like · Edit · 46 minutes ago

Neil Penn
You have now simply become belligerent. I will no longer engage with you unless you provide a source for the claim "Not posting source is the common behaviour of chemtrails denier too."
Like · 44 minutes ago

Aji Condro
Many chemtrails denier will stop replying after I post link from scientific community.
Like · Edit · 43 minutes ago

Aji Condro
Here is the evidence, that despite denier claim to be scientific, they never post link to scientific site to support their claim:
http://www.thetruthdenied.com/news/2013/08/26/evidence-of-deliberate-disinformation-in-chemtrails-group/

If you spot source from those denier link, let me know. Because I don't see it.

Besides I already proven that you have wrong understanding for contrails.
Edited · Like · Edit · 35 minutes ago

Aji Condro
How dare you claim to be scientific but you do not post source?

How can I know that your source can be trusted?
Edited · Like · Edit · 36 minutes ago

Neil Penn
Once again, I am part of the "scientific community", of which you clearly are just an internet participant, and your distastefulness is escalating. You seem unaware that the Schmidt-Appleman criterion for contrail formation, and the additional requirement for supersaturation over ice for contrail persistence, are thermodynamic phenomena. Particulate is required as condensation nuclei (this is universally understood) but more or less particulate influences density/visibility of the trail, not WHETHER it will form.
Like · 32 minutes ago

Aji Condro
If your source is not from internet, give me the title of the book and who wrote them.

Yes, contrails can form without particle. But are they more common than contrails that form from particle?

What do you know about the scientist opinion about contrails? would they care, do not care or very worry about contrails?
Edited · Like · Edit · 27 minutes ago

Neil Penn

Aji Condro, excuse me but how dare you ask me "How can I know that your source can be trusted?" when you have posted a link from "thetruthdenied"?? That's amazing.
Like · 27 minutes ago


Neil Penn
Gierens (2006) is an easy introduction.

http://elib.dlr.de/45218/1/g-214.pdf
Like · 24 minutes ago

Neil Penn
Ari, Gierens also collaborated on this poster which discussed aerodynamic contrails that form without exhaust particulates. The persistence or otherwise of these trails is a different matter and unrelated to WHETHER they will form or not.

http://contrailscience.com/files/Gierens_Aerodynamic_poster_060625.pdf
Like · 18 minutes ago

Aji Condro
The link to thetruthdenied are evidence that chemtrails denier do no post source for their claim. It contain link to facebook post that people can verify themself.

Your g-214.pdf link do not support your claim. But thanks for your link, I really appreciate it.
Edited · Like · Edit · 14 minutes ago

Aji Condro
Your Gieren link:
"show that condensation sometimes starts right above the wings of cruising aircraft. This demonstrates the existence of contrails DIFFERENT from the well studied jet exhaust contrails. The present study is a first investigation of the conditions that lead to the appearance of aerodynamic contrails."

They talk about different kind of contrails....
Edited · Like · Edit · 7 minutes ago

Neil Penn
Steufer and Wendler discuss the thermodynamic contrail factor in this conference paper. Note that the parameters are just temperature and relative humidity.

http://contrail.gi.alaska.edu/misc/Stuefer_HyannisOct04.pdf
Like · 13 minutes ago

Aji Condro
From g-214.pdf:
"In the wake of an aircraft, the humidity can reach transiently very high
supersaturation, sufficient to let the EXHAUST PARTICLES act as condensation nuclei."

Why you do not mention it when I ask you what is contrails?

What do you know about the scientist opinion about contrails? would they care, do not care or very worry about contrails?
Like · Edit · 12 minutes ago

Aji Condro
Stuefer_HyannisOct04.pdf has no data for the concentration of particle. the parameters are just temperature and relative humidity because that is what they can measure.

Particle concentration are not mentioned simply because they can't measure it.
Like · Edit · 8 minutes ago

Aji Condro
What do you know about the scientist opinion about contrails? would they care, do not care or very worry about contrails?
Like · Edit · 8 minutes ago

Neil Penn
We have discussed this already: it is accepted that there are condensation nuclei present for droplets to form. Note Gierens poster that I linked, where there were no exhaust particulates involved in the aerodynamic contrail formation.

It is an entirely different, and purely thermodynamic, matter as whether a contrail will persist. You have been given ample information to now know this.

You are now asking me to speculate on the cares and worries of other scientists and I have nothing to offer on that. I think we are pretty well done now aren't we? You have reading to do.
Edited · Like · 5 minutes ago

Aji Condro
Yes, we are done. It is proven that you are wrong but you deny it. And you are the one who need reading.

You dare to claim that the persistent contrails that people see is aerodinamic contrails. When it is obvious that most of the research for contrails are aimed to jet exhaust contrails.

Bellow is a story of youtube chemtrails denier that lie about scientist worry for contrails.
http://d-trail.blogspot.com/2013/09/youtube-disinformation-debunked.html

I will share this post in full without editing and let the reader decide who is correct.

All about Chemtrails : Youtube disinformation - "Debunked: ChemTrails and ChemClouds"
d-trail.blogspot.com
Edited · Like · Edit · Just now

Neil Penn
I don't know if the difficulty here is the language barrier but be sure to include this:

"You dare to claim that the persistent contrails that people see is aerodinamic contrails. When it is obvious that most of the research for contrails are aimed to jet exhaust contrails."

Now, anyone who reads this and has English as their first language will see that this thread has been entirely about jet exhaust contrails and only towards the end did I introduce Gierens' poster about those (pretty cool) aerodynamic contrails. I did so to show that not all contrails require exhaust particulates as condensation nuclei.

I will respectfully pass on your invitation for to me to read some BlogSpot about what some people have said on YouTube.

Farewell
Edited · Like · 5 minutes ago

As usual, chemtrails denier ignore the particle significance in contrails creation, Neil Penn claim: "Contrails are just a natural consequence of injecting a stream of water vapour into air below -40C that is high enough in humidity that the ice crystals don't sublimate.". No mention about particles.

The last replay is in relation toNeil Penn assumption that " Particulate is required as condensation nuclei (this is universally understood) but more or less particulate influences density/visibility of the trail, not WHETHER it will form."

I already mention that contrails can be aerodinamic. But I believe that the majority of contrails that people see is contrails from jet exhaust contrails.

NASA ask people to watch contrails (explained more at previous article). Their description of contrails for that project page is:
National Aeronautics and Space Administration - The Contrail Education Project - Contrail Science

What are contrails?

Contrails are clouds formed when water vapor condenses and freezes around small particles (aerosols) that exist in aircraft exhaust. Some of that water vapor comes from the air around the plane; and, some is added by the exhaust of the aircraft.

The exhaust of an aircraft contains both gas (vapor) and solid particles. Both of these are important in the formation of contrails. Some elements of the exhaust gasses are not involved in contrail formation but do constitute air pollution. Emissions include carbon dioxide, water vapor, nitrogen oxides (NOx), carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons such as methane, sulfates (SOx), and soot and metal particles.

In that page contrails only refer to contrails from jet engine, where particles is the important part of contrails creation.

NASA ask people to help them observe contrails, their description of contrails mention particles, we can assume that relevant discussion about contrails should mention particle. I believe this should answer Neil Penn post " I did so to show that not all contrails require exhaust particulates as condensation nuclei.". Yes, aerodinamic contrails exists, but particle induced contrails is more dominant. And in NASA's case, contrails refer to exhaust contrails. They ignore aerodinamic contrails. It seems Neil Penn care more about aerodinamic trails and seems to even use aerodinamic trails property to explain exhaust contrails.

Also Neil Penn claim about universally understood:  "Particulate is required as condensation nuclei (this is universally understood)", is wrong.. As shown by this wrong description of contrails by Mick West:
Contrail Science - Hybrid Contrails – A New Classification

Exhaust contrails are formed by the mixing of the hot humid exhaust of the engines with cold humid surrounding air, creating long streamers of clouds. If the conditions are right then these can persist and spread. These are the most common type of contrail observed.

The link also mention Aerodinamic contrails. No mention about particles at all in that description of exhaust contrails. There is not mention about particles in Neil Penn earlier post about contrails too. It is nice that even Mick West admit that exhaust contrails is the most common type of contrails though. I don't have chance to ask what Neil Penn think about this.

Claim of universally understood is a lie considering  MrGopherHead clearly deny the significance of particles in contrails creation, how this chemtrails denier call scientist chemtard, shown in the second part in link bellow:
Youtube disinformation - "Debunked: ChemTrails and ChemClouds"

Most chemtrails denier deny science.

Chemtrails do not require plane with huge water tank

Many chemtrails debunker / denier claim that chemtrails is impossible because that kind of operation require a lot of water. But the science show that it does not require that.

Here is some example of the claim:
Pilots explain Contrails - and the Chemtrail Hoax

Stefan, if you estimate the amount of material that is contained in a long contrail, you will find that it weighs far, far more than any aircraft carry. I will post the calculations later, but remember, the chemicals said to be contained in a "chemtrail" weigh four times what the equivalent volume of ice weighs, making it even more impossible.

Like · Sep 26

Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum - Why the chemtrail HOAX is the most ridiculous conspiracy on the net.

An aircraft CAN NOT CARRY anywhere near the amount of material needed to make trails the sizes you claim.

What is happening is that moisture ALREADY IN THE air is changing state and becomes visible.

After you read more you will find that those two sentence are conflicting each other.

Plane make trails because of particle. This nano particle (results of burn is nano) will then attract water to condense to it.

http://science-edu.larc.nasa.gov/contrail-edu/science.html

"Persistent contrails are ice clouds, so they are mostly made of ice. They also are likely to contain aircraft exhaust products (including soot and dissolved gases like sulfur dioxide) , but they are overwhelmingly made from moisture condensed out of the surrounding air. In one example reported by Knollenburg (October 1972, Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences, Pages 1367-1374), the amount of moisture released by the burning of jet fuel from a research aircraft was 1.7 grams of water for every meter of flight path. However, the total water measured in a persistent contrail produced by the aircraft was conservatively measured (that is, it was likely an underestimate) to be between 20700 to 41200 grams of water for every meter of the contrail path! Nearly all of the contrail is created from the moisture in the atmosphere. 

The exhaust products from aircraft are often measured using an emission index (mass (in grams) of exhaust product divided by mass (in kg) of jet fuel burned). The sum total of the exhaust products turns out to be greater than one (the mass of the exhaust products is greater than the mass of the fuel burned because the exhaust contains oxygen from surrounding air combined with fuel during combustion)."

 Regional Climate Modeling of Aircraft Induced Cloudiness

"It has been shown (IPCC, 1999, IPCC, 2007) that this so-called aircraft induced cloudiness (AIC) has a warming impact on climate,

This graph shows that contrails can form even if the air is completely dry, but these contrails are  short-lived and the ice-crystals evaporated quickly. Only if the ambient air is ice-supersaturated (case 3) water vapor from the surroundings can condensate on the ice-crystals formed, and the contrail can grow into a cirrus clouds, which rapidly becomes indiscernible from a natural cloud.  "

More particle means thicker trails. The particle do not have to be a lot too, 5500 ppm is enough to make thick trails. 5500 ppm is 0.55%.
Particle formation in jet aircraft exhaust and contrails for different sulfur containing fuels

Abstract: - A series of experiments has been performed observing contrails formation of twin-angine jet aircraft (ATTAS-VFW 614 and Airbus A310-300) run with different sulfur containing fuels on the two engines at the same time. The fuel sulfur mass content was varied from 2 to 5500 ppm. The results suggest that contrails particles form mainly from soot particles. The higher the sulfur content the more the soot particles get activated as condensation neclei. Particles start condensing in the liquid phase but have to freeze quickly, and the water vapor mass accomodation coefficient must be larger than about 0.2 both for liquid and ice particles, in order to form a visible contrails within 25 m after the aircraft as observed.

Ultrafine particle size distributions measured in aircrat exhaust plumes

Fast Response measurement of particle size distributions were made for the first time in the near field plume of a Boeing 737-300 aircraft burning fuel with fuel sulfur contents (FSCs) of 56 and 2.6 ppmm, as well as in a fresh and dissipating contrails from the same aircraft using nine particle counters operating in parallel. suggest that non-S species can become important contributors to particulate mass at very low FSCs . 

This modification to the stratospheric aerosol surface area strongly affects stratospheric ozone by perturbing the NOx, HOx and ClOx budgets, mostly by repartitioning the odd nitrogen budget via N2O5 hydrolysis. As more data are obtained at low FSCs, it appear increasingly likely that non-S species become significant contributors of the aerosol mass budget in aircraft plumes as FSC value drop bellow several tens of ppmm.

What does it means? It means that to make a thick trails, the sprayer can just use a little amount of particle. This particle will then gather the water from surrounding (and create problem like drought, etc) and make it visible as line clouds or spread to create a huge cover of cirrus clouds. Both contrails and their cirrus clouds are known to cause warming (although some chemtrails activist said otherwise, which is discussed in other article).

Chemtrails debunker may already know this fact but choose to mislead people by claiming that contrails is water vapor. They know because when they explain about why trails can persist, they say that the water is from surrounding:
Irish Weather Online - Contrails v Chemtrails: The Science That Debunks The Conspiracy

" The study found that exhaust gases contained around 1.7 g of water vapour for every metre flown, but found actual persistent contrails to contain at least 30,000 times that level (20,700-41,200 g per metre). This means that the overwhelming majority of the water in contrails comes from the atmosphere, with only around 1 in every 30,000 molecules originating from the burning of the fuel."

They know full well that persistent contrails get the water from the surrounding air. But then they claim that chemtrails is impossible because contrails is just water vapor condensing, and the water required for long operation need water volume more than the plane?

Also keep in mind that taking water from the surrounding means the trails rob the water from the surrounding, which then can cause drought because less water means less precipitation. By robbing water from the atmosphere trails can cause serious problem.


The sky today is obviously more white than the sky of my youth. Rainbow / halo around the sun or moon also become a common occurence, no longer a rare event anymore. This is sign of something wrong. Other article also already explain how scientist have a great concern for contrails. Contrails is serious problem.

Chemtrails debunker or chemtrails denier often play trick. Be carefull.

Trails heating property disinformation that chemtrails expert often agree to

I found it sad that in many cases chemtrails so called expert are agreeing to the lie told by chemtrails denier or debunker. It become a big problem because many chemtrails activist believe in those so called expert in chemtrails.

I wish that is just an oversight, I wish that those so called expert do a thorough investigation for their source of information. One example of this oversight is trails heating property.

For some reason, this so called expert have claim that the chemtrails that we see on the sky is an attempt to cool the earth, to prevent imminent meltdown caused by global warming of some kind. One version mention the warming caused by man activity, other version mention ozone depletion, other version mention the release of arctic methane.

In this article I will only address the claim that chemtrails is done to cool the earth.

Seriously, I still wonder how do those so called chemtrails expert get those conclusion. Where do they get that kind of information. Any research about trails effect to climate is conclude them as warming. Claim of particle as cooling only exist in the global warming supporter group. And that supposed to refer to balloon released particle, not to particle released by jet plane. The research for particle released by jet plane conclude that trails and their clouds have produce warming.

The link that mention balloon released particle mention this:
Geoengineers to release planet-cooling gas into New Mexico atmosphere

"Two Harvard engineers are planning to spray thousands of tonnes of sun-reflecting chemical particles into the atmosphere to artificially cool the planet, using a balloon flying 80,000 feet over Fort Sumner, New Mexico.

The field experiment in solar geoengineering aims to ultimately create a technology to replicate the observed effects of volcanoes that spew sulphates into the stratosphere, using sulphate aerosols to bounce sunlight back to space and decrease the temperature of the Earth."

The article mention about a plan. With a balloon. I have personally witness chemtrails myself, and no matter how often I watch it, I never see balloon release it. And I am pretty sure that scientist would call it contrails.

Here is the opinion of scientist  for contrails warming property:
Emissions trading in international civil aviation by Öko-Institut e.V. Institute for Applied Ecology

"Persistent contrails reduce not only solar radiation onto the earth's surface, but also the quantity of long-wave radiation from the earth into outer space. On average, they increase the greenhouse effect, in particular during the night and over warm and light surfaces.

It turned out that, for all periods of observation, the radiative forcing of contrails is greater that that of CO2. This can be attributed to the fact that the sensitivity effect of contrails is more intense than the accumulation and growth effects of CO2."

Contrails, Cirrus Trends, and Climate, PATRICK MINNIS, Atmospheric Sciences, NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, Virginia

"Using results from a general circulation model simulation of contrails, the cirrus trends over the United States are estimated to cause a tropospheric warming"

I still have many other link that claim that contrails produce warming. So I really confuse for why many chemtrails expert claim that those trails are cooling the earth. From the document so far, the claim that releasing particle in the sky will cool the earth is only supported by simulation. Not real life experiment results. If there are such experiment, I can not find it. But I have dozens of articles that conclude that contrails warm the earth.

What a confusing stance by those so called chemtrails experts.

Nasa said: Look up!

The disinformationist may claim that science do not care about the trails, or trails is not a problem at all, because contrails is just water vapor. But in reality, science do care about contrails, because contrails is sign of pollution, sign of particle being released into the air by the aircraft.

One example is from NASA. They have a few project that ask people to observe contrails:

MY NASA DATA - Contrail Watching for Kids

Science Project: Contrail Watching for Kids

Web Id: P3

Purpose: Contrails are long clouds made by high-flying aircraft. Because kids are so good at watching clouds, they can be easily taught to identify contrails.

Age Range: 6 – 10

Time Required: Young children can observe and report on contrails in only a few minutes a day.

Significance: Kids know that some clouds signal rain and other mean fair weather. They need to know that contrails are actually manmade clouds and that they can cause measurable changes in the temperature far below where they live and go to school.

MY NASA DATA - Contrail Studies

Science Project: Contrail Studies

Web Id: P4

Purpose: Serious students, citizen scientists and regular weather watchers can use a camera and simple weather instruments to monitor and study contrails and to determine their possible environmental effects.

Age Range: 11 to adult

Time Required: Contrails can be observed, photographed and reported in only a few minutes a day. Scientific studies of contrails take more time and can provide important scientific information.

Significance: Contrails are often more difficult for satellites to detect than clouds, especially when they remain narrow and do not spread outward. Students, home weather station operators and citizen scientists can provide important scientific information by documenting the contrails they observe and reporting their findings. It is important simply to know the number of days contrails were present over a particular location in a given year.

National Aeronautics and Space Administration - The Contrail Education Project - Observing, Describing, and Identifying Contrails

Purpose: To enable students to observe contrails, describe them using a common vocabulary, and compare their descriptions with the official contrail types. 

Overview: Students can observe contrails and identify which of the three contrail types they are observing. The students can sketch the contrails, developing personal and scientific vocabulary, and descriptions of contrails. 

Student Outcomes: Students will be able to identify contrail types using standard contrail type names and descriptions. 

NASA - Langley Research Center - NASA and GLOBE: Observing the Sky for Science

NASA and GLOBE, an international student Earth science program, invite the public to join in a scientific experiment on Oct. 13. It's simple: observe the sky over your area and report on the presence or absence of contrails.

Image Left: The Contrail Education program at NASA Langley Research Center works to educate students around the world about atmospheric science research and teach fundamental science concepts. The program is led by Lin Chambers of the Science Directorate, in collaboration with other NASA scientists and professionals, as well as with the National Science Foundation and the GLOBE program.

Teachers, students and anyone interested in helping to develop a better understanding of the Earth are welcome to participate in the second annual Fall Contrail Count-a-Thon by submitting contrail observations through an Internet Data Entry Form. Designed to give students and adults an opportunity to collaborate with scientists in a hands-on, real-world science experiment, the Count-a-Thon will also teach participants about contrails, a unique feature of our atmosphere.

Contrails are cirrus clouds formed when water vapor condenses and freezes around small particles (aerosols) in aircraft exhaust. Some of the water vapor comes from the surrounding air; some from the aircraft exhaust itself. Contrails, especially thin ones, are very hard to see from satellites and may have an impact on Earth's atmosphere.

"To augment what we can see from satellite, we hope to receive visual observation reports from lots of people all over the world. Both reports of contrails and reports with no contrails are equally valuable for this research," said Lin Chambers, director of the GLOBE contrail education project at Langley Research Center.

Contrails increase Earth's cloudiness while impacting the atmosphere and climate. Observations in the U.S. and around the globe may help scientists better understand the atmospheric conditions that enable the formation of contrails.

They also mention the importance of observing contrails:
National Aeronautics and Space Administration - The Contrail Education Project - Importance of Student Data in the Study of Contrails

"Why is it important to study contrails?

 Clouds are the largest variable controlling Earth's atmospheric temperature and climate. Any change in global cloud cover may contribute to long-term changes in Earth's climate (see The Role of Clouds from the S'COOL Project). Likewise, any change in Earth's climate may have effects on natural resources. Contrails, especially persistent contrails, represent a human-caused increase in high thin clouds in the Earth's atmosphere, and are likely to be affecting climate and ultimately our natural resources."

National Aeronautics and Space Administration - The Contrail Education Project - Contrail Science

What are contrails?

Contrails are clouds formed when water vapor condenses and freezes around small particles (aerosols) that exist in aircraft exhaust. Some of that water vapor comes from the air around the plane; and, some is added by the exhaust of the aircraft. 

The exhaust of an aircraft contains both gas (vapor) and solid particles. Both of these are important in the formation of contrails. Some elements of the exhaust gasses are not involved in contrail formation but do constitute air pollution. Emissions include carbon dioxide, water vapor, nitrogen oxides (NOx), carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons such as methane, sulfates (SOx), and soot and metal particles.

 Some important point from those link are:
- NASA do not call the trails geoengineering, they call it contrails. If you talk to people affiliated with NASA, you should not refer chemtrails as geoengineering. You must refer chemtrails as at least contrails.
- While the government may ignore it, science have a great concern for contrails.
- Contrails pose serious risk to the environment.
- Contrails happen because particles are being released from aircraft.

Facebook page dedicated to improve the image of chemtrails

Chemtrails was used to be associated with something with bad intention. But there is now a facebook page that claim chemtrails is done for something good. The page is International Chemtrail Association.

This page is a serious threat to the attempt to stop the pollution / problem caused by chemtrails. Just look how that page introduce chemtrails:
Chemtrails, what should you know and why they are good for you.

Chemtrails, what should you know and why they are good for you.

What's a chemtrail?

- A chemtrail, or chemical trail is nothing more than a simple contrail (condensation trail) with Active Aerosol Compounds (AAC), which are meant to manage solar radiation.

Are chemtrails hazardous?

- Not at all. The spraying of chemicals occurs at high altitudes, when conditions are ideal to the occurrence of contrails. Chemical compounds, and nano particles are added to a plane's fuel in order to make a contrail persist more than it usually would. This allows these compounds to effectively block a significant portion of solar radiation, thus cooling the atmosphere, countering the effects of Global Warming and greenhouse gases.
Since contrails are known to spread in a form of white haze like cirrus, it's the perfect scenario to perform a valuable, and safe GeoEngineering program.

Why are Chemtrails not what you think they are?

- Several conspiracy theories are circulating over the internet about the health implications of chemtrails and the reason why they're being sprayed.
A study conducted by the Oxford University points to positive aspects of solar radiation management and how high altitude spraying cannot have a significant effect on the lower atmosphere.

We need to act now! Global Warming is a serious threat, and it must be addressed with urgency. The International Chemtrail Association is a non profit organization, dedicated to educate people about the reality of chemtrails and their importance.

Join us in this experience and share your opinion about GeoEngineering, and the importance of countering climate change.

Ever since GeoEngineeringWatch! started to associate chemtrails with geoengineering, I already predict this to happen. Geoengineeringwatch always mention chemtrails as geoengineering. They tell people that chemtrails is an attempt to remedy global warming.

Dane Wigington, the owner of geoengineeringwatch, tell people to stop calling chemtrails as chemtrails because that word is now associated with lunatic or something. Even if we ignore the fact that Dane Wigington fail to make Mick West submit to this kind of definition, there are still a lot of reason why we should not call chemtrails as geoengineering.

I have made some article to show that chemtrails is not a remedy at all, and chemtrails may be the real cause of global warming.
Chemtrails are not the same as geoengineering; the public has been hoodwinked!
Chemtrails are not Geoengineering

But I guess people did not listen. Even geoengineeringwatch still promote arctic methane release earth melting catastrophy, still telling people that chemtrails is geoengineering, still mention about how the spraying is done to cover the damage:
HAARP Geoengineering with Alchemy, Arctic Methane Global Emergency, UK Gov tells climate alarmists to “Chill Out”

In my opinion, chemtrails is the cause of the damage. It is not a cover or shield.

The activists ignorance, even among dearest friend, has forced me to make a group that spesifically define chemtrails as not a geoengineering:
Chemtrails not geoengineering not harmless contrails

Anyone who consider chemtrails as geoengineering is hampering the anti chemtrails action. If people start to beleive that chemtrails is done for a good purpose, then people would not have reason to stop them. I hope more activist realize this.