Contrails, Chemtrails and Conspiracy Theories

Posted on 25. Nov, 2008 by in Featured

I ran across this “conspiracy “while I was looking for another video; amazing the total BS floating around the internet. This is so easily debunked, first let’s look at their case. It is such nonsense; I’ll limit it to just a few points:

1. Contrails are a new phenomenon.
2. Chemical dispersion is evidenced by “fall streaks”.
3. Cork screwing contrails are evidence of spraying.
4. The fact they are not always present is evidence of spraying.
5. Various pictures allegedly showing chemtrails.

The basic thesis is that the world governments are spraying chemicals on us to reduce the population. The fact that these governments have never agreed on anything in the history of the world, I’ll let lay.

As someone who has generated contrails for 26 years I feel I can speak on them with authority. There are two causes of contrails, engine combustion and pressure differential (lower). I’ll answer each of the 5 examples:

1. Contrails are NOT a new phenomenon. Below is a picture of B-17 flying fortresses in WWII.

2. Fall streaks are merely the breakup of the contrail, depending on temperature some trails will be laden with ice; that ice begins to fall away faster than vapor.
3. Cork screwing is caused by wing tip vortices. Swept winged aircraft spill air off the end of the wing, it is called span wise flow, this air rotates. The vortices increase in size as they move away from the wing and affect the contrails giving them a cork screw look.
4. Contrails are dependent on atmospheric conditions so when the conditions are not met they do not form.
5. Pictures:

This is a typical contrail affected by wing tip vortices.

Pictures of orange chemicals being dumped (there are many on the net) are simply contrails at sunset like the picture above. The difference is that the (Chemtrail) picture is taken in flight and so the only orange coloring in the photo is the contrail.

On a typical air to air mission the first thing you would do is find the con level. As lead you’d have your wingman climb until the contrails formed, the altitude would always vary. You would call “conning” and he would reply with the altitude he was at. As you closed on your opponent you would keep your flight below that altitude so the contrails wouldn’t give away your position.

The other way they form is by pressure lowering rapidly. Those are the contrails you see down low (engine cons form high) normally coming off of an extended flap edge or wing tip. They like humid air. When I was on the USS Midway we spent a lot of time in South China Sea near the Philippines. Hot and humid the air was ripe for pressure cons. We used to go to low altitude and pull just a bit harder on the stick (1.5 g) to get them to form on the wing. It was funny to pump the stick and watch them appear and disappear immediately depending on whether you were pulling or pushing.

You could always tell when an F/A-18 Hornet was turning on you because his aircraft turned into a ball of vapor generated by the wing at high alpha. The huge drop in pressure created by a spike in lift as the pilot yanked on the g’s created a very impressive con.

A Blue Angel F/A-18 Hornet just starting to form a pressure contrail.

An Austrailian F-111 with a full wing contrail.

London 1940 during the Battle of Britain

The above photo shows a dog fight over London in 1940. When the weather is just right the contrails last for a long time. I was over the Olympic Mountains flying a simulated air combat mission against another EA-6B Prowler. We turned and burned for a long time ending up near the bottom of our airspace. I pitched up and was startled because I saw so many contrails above us, initially I thought there must be another flight in our airspace. But then I realized we had generated them all, just like the above photo and they had just not dissipated.

So, the contrail conspiracy, I can positively verify is total BS.

No Responses to “Contrails, Chemtrails and Conspiracy Theories”

  1. John McNulty 26 November 2008 at 04:25 #

    Congratulations. Well-argued presentation of cause and effect facts. A is A and condensation is condensation. Those interested in reality rather than superstition will find it well worth looking at “Bad Clouds” and “Bad Greenhouse” plus the related FAQs.

  2. chip 27 November 2008 at 10:21 #

    Thanks John I’ll take a look at the links.

Leave a Reply