Sunday, August 14, 2011

Persistent contrails relation with drought

Regardless if you believe in chemtrails or not. The trails still not harmless. At least trails heat the earth. It eliminate rain clouds which can cool the earth and replacing it with cirrus that can heat the earth
"The researchers note that contrail cirrus also reduce natural cirrus coverage"
"Contrail-cirrus clusters build up regionally and may prevent natural clouds from forming"
"We also find that contrail cirrus cause a significant decrease in natural cloudiness"

This is something I already observe my self and still waiting for a chance to record them my self.

Thursday, July 7, 2011

Debunking Old-timer Debunks Chemtrails

The link:

"Day graciously agreed to examine photographs of chemtrails to see if he spotted anything unusual. 'This is a perfectly normal situation with cirrocumulus cloud and a single spreading contrail,' he declared after inspecting one photo for a full minute."

The problem is, it is not possible to differentiate between contrails and chemtrail from just a photos. You need video or atleast information of duration.

"The criss-cross pattern is a consequence of planes flying criss-cross patterns....' And the next. 'I've seen many situations like this one....'"

Seeing many do not means that it is a natural phenomena.

"Contrail formation, Day explained, depends on the relative humidity of the atmosphere-- he ratio of what is to what could be at a particular temperature. When relative humidity is low, contrails dissipate within seconds. But when relative humidity is high, especially at the subzerotemperatures of the upper atmosphere, the addition of even a tiny amount of water vapor acts as a catalyst. Under these conditions, contrails may linger and spread to cover the whole sky."

That is true, but it is very questionable that the condition require would happen often. Scientist mention that it rarely to happen.

"At length, Day extracted from his bookshelf a well-thumbed edition of Peterson's Field Guide to Clouds and Weather, which he co-authored in 1991 (a good 10 years before chemtrails became widely discussed), turned to the section on contrails, and pointed to a photograph of a thick, white plume--a plume that looked for all the world like a chemtrail"

Exactly, we can not tell the difference of contrails and chemtrail from just photos. And no one can tell if the photos is actually chemtrail or contrails without more data.

Debunking Contrails ("CHEMTRAILS") are NORMAL

The link:

Here is the report from from September 14th, 2001:

"he International Space Station crew sees them all the time, except when airplanes are not flying, as happened in the days after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. Three days after suicide airplane hijackers toppled the World Trade Center in New York and slammed into the Pentagon in Washington, D.C., the station crew noted an obvious absence of airborne jetliners from their perch 240 miles (384 kilometers) above Earth. 'I’ll tell you one thing that’s really strange: Normally when we go over the U.S., the sky is like a spider web of contrails,' U.S. astronaut and outpost commander Frank Culbertson told flight controllers at NASA’s Mission Control Center in Houston. 'And now the sky is just about completely empty. There are no contrails in the sky,' he added. 'It’s very, very weird.' 'I hadn’t thought of that perspective,' fellow astronaut Cady Coleman replied."
Dissappearance of contrails at the same time of inoperational commercial jet plane do not means the trails is the works of commercial aeroplane because at that time any other plane also do not fly.

The facts is trails a product from aeroplane, but it is not certain yet if commercial plane is responsible for it.

Debunking The April Fool's Joke that nailed Cliff Carnicom

The link:

As part of ongoing analyses requested by Sen. P. Sanchez and a onstituent, this office has performed several additional analyses of the Sweep Assay samples collected with the Airborne Assay Mission of 5 September, 1999 (the "contrail/chemtrail" flights). As directed, and because of the clearly controversial nature of the test results, these were not handled at AlbuChemical as usual, but were performed in-house by M. D. Stevens and J. P. Aguilar.
Even if it is a valid independent results, that do not falsify chemtrail existance.

Not every plane with trails produce chemtrail. And from the science data so far, no one has ever sampled the trails that last for hours using plane.

Both man do sample contrails. But normal contrails is not chemtrail.

Wednesday, July 6, 2011

Debunking Kim Johnson's Chemtrail Analysis

This is to answer:

have read the letters and reviewed the referenced web pages . In so doing, I have viewed a number of photos purporting to be of aircraft spraying the chemical or biological material into the atmosphere.

In summary, there is no evidence that these "chemtrails" are other than expected, normal contrails from jet aircraft that vary in their shapes, duration, and general presentation based on prevailing weather conditions.
Judging from photos alone is not sufficient to tell the difference. But if they really an expert they should notice anomaly like mentioned bellow:
"Contrails are frequently visible at distances as close as 25-35 m behind the aircraft engines. Using an analytical model of ice crystal growth in the exhaust plume, showed that the number density of ice crystals nucleated must be at least about 104cm-3 in order for the contrail to be visible this quickly...... The simulations suggest that fleshly nucleated sulfuric acid/water aerosols could not grow large enough to spontaneously freeze in the time required."

In summary, there is no evidence that these "chemtrails" are other than expected, normal contrails from jet aircraft that vary in their shapes, duration, and general presentation based on prevailing weather conditions
But to be able to persist for hours, the condition required is extreme and will be very rarely happen in reality.

If the atmospheric water content is not consistent with altitude (picture atmospheric "waves" of high water vapor content below a layer of low water vapor content much like waves on the ocean), then a jet will alternately pass through air that allows contrail formation and air that does not. This gives the appearance of a dashed line if the plane is flying at, or near the perpendicular to the waves.
A possible explanation but not the only one. And may not be the real situation.

There were no pictures or evidence that indicated anything other than the above contrail formation phenomena.
Scientist still can not explain why trails can last for hours too many times on an impossible situation.

Debunking A Pilot's View on Chemtrails

This is to answer argumentation bellow:

If an aircraft were spraying some form of liquid or powdered solid, such as bacterial agents or aluminum particulates as suggested by many theorists, it should be most visible directly behind the trailing edge of the wing (or wherever the nozzles may be located), becoming less visible as it dissipates in the atmosphere in the wake of the plane.
The explanation do not account for the fact that agent exist to modify the behaviour of ice particle, the one that influence the creation of contrails.

Agent that can dissolve or sustain contrail exists. There are many document than mention this agent.

One: video or photographic evidence of aircraft emitting materials in a manner inconsistent with normal contrails, as described above. Two: video evidence of a single aircraft making multiple passes over an area consistent with the formation of the grid pattern. It would be helpful if we could actually see evidence of the spray nozzles being turned on and off during the maneuvers.
It is unfortunate that many who observe it do not have chance to record it. But I do observe it my self.

I seen comb grid, X and V. That can not be explained by wind drift because that happen so fast, in minutes, that the wind must have been supersonic if it is the work of wind.

Descending air currents found in wind shear conditions can carry the aircraft’s exhaust gases to lower elevations and warmer temperatures where the moisture will vaporize, rendering it invisible. The portion of the contrail on the other side of the shear will remain in conditions that support its persistence. This accounts for breaks in visible contrails, which some have theorized indicates the “spray nozzles” have been turned off.
The condition of the sky surely not extreme enough to produce extreme humidity in feets range. And yet we can see trails that last for hours next to a blank. The chance of air pocket having many times more / less humidity is absurd. having 150% RH next to 75% RH should be impossible.

What has happened to our “normal” clouds?
Scientific literature that explain how contrails remove normal clouds exist. Trails that last for hours like chemtrail should be much worse.

The chemicals that exist in contrails are the same ones produced by our automobiles – hydrocarbons, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, and various oxides of nitrogen.
Volvo aero magazine mention that aircraft produce more significant danger to the environment because they happen at high latitude.

Are “chemtrails” real?
No scientific document ever mention sampling of trails that last for hours. Many scientific document can not explain the existence of trails that last for hours.

Chemtrails existance still not denied yet by scientific community.

Tuesday, July 5, 2011

Debungking US Air Force chemtrail hoax

USAF mention chemtrail as hoax, more can be read here:

Contrails can remain visible for very long periods of time with the lifetime a function of the temperature, humidity, winds, and aircraft exhaust characteristics.
Yes, it is possible for contrails to remain visible for very long time, but scientist found that the condition required for trails that last for hours is very very rare.

Scientist often found that trails exist in a condition not suitable for very persistence trails. Some example:

Aviation and the Global Atmosphere
"The computed contrail coverage over southeastern Asia is only slightly smaller than that over Europe and North America. Although air traffic is much less extensive over southeastern Asia, this high contrail coverage may result because this region more often has ice-supersaturated air."

The above article speculate that the sky of southeastern Asia has more ice-supersaturated air. However, that speculation is denied by this article:

The Global Distribution of Supersaturation in the Upper Troposphere from the
Atmospheric Infrared Sounder

"In the subtropics, very little supersaturation is seen. Seasonally, supersaturation in the upper tropical troposphere follows major regions of convection (and the supply of humidity).

In middle and high latitudes, there is significant supersaturation near the tropopause, especially in the regions of storm tracks. Highest frequencies in the upper troposphere (Fig. 9) are found in spring and summer. In polar regions (Fig. 10), supersaturation is often seen near the surface as well, particularly in winter, and is quite high over the Antarctic ice cap.

Above article explain that strange things is happening. High contrails coverage is seen on a region with very little supersaturaion and much less air traffic.

Next article explain how the scientist observe contrail that form defying existing knowledge.
Measurements of the growth of the ice budget in a persisting contrail
"In order that the contrail be visible a temperature as much as several degrees bellow the critical temperature is generally required.

In this experiment, as shown in Fig. 5, we actually observed the contrail to form and grow at a temperature several degrees above the critical temperature as defined by appleman, or the laboratory contrail studies of Pillie and Jiusto.

Contrails formed by aircraft may appear to form a grid as the winds disperse the contrails.
Like explained previously, wind can not explain grid that is formed not in sequence. Grid is often seen formed in random order, but will results in almost perfect gap between one trails to another.

Contrails are safe and are a natural phenomenon. They pose no health hazard of any kind.
This is a complete lie. Aircraft exhaust output is not any safer than car exhaust output. Even the aircraft industries acknowledge that jet engine output is not healthy. And Volvoair even mention that aircraft exhaust output may have more impact because they created at very high altitude. Clouds created by toxic substance surely not healthy.

Many people notice the difference of health effects of natural clouds and contrail clouds. Some notice health problem immediately, not waiting for the aerosol to settle down.

I never heard research done on effect of contrail clouds to human.

The bacteria claimed to be DOD developed and patented is actually a common, naturally occurring bacteria.

While the bacteria can occur naturally, the chance of them can be sampled is never mentioned.

One thing that struct me most is how USAF consider contrails to be safe. Previous post explain that contrails and contrail clouds is concluded to be a much stronger promoter of global warming. If government really care about global warming, they should already done something to contrails and contrail clouds. But they have done nothing.

Friday, June 24, 2011

Debunking Jay Reynolds claims

This is to answer chemtrail debunker Jay Renolds.

"First, one should be aware that none of these claims can be considered either a hypothesis or a theory, they all fall in the realm of speculation."
Some scientific literature do exist to support some of the claim.

"-Poisonous Substance in Fuel"
One should remember that every jet exhaust produce poisonous substance for human. The difference is in the level. So it is not too important if it contain dangerous substance or not, jet engine output will still be poisonous.

"-Weather Modification & -Solar Radiation Mitigation"
Science literature exist that explain how normal contrails and cirrus cloud it produce have bad effects to the environment. The conclusion is contrails and contrail cirrus modify weather. They increase regional temperature significantly.

Also scientific reference exist about how to induce or to prevent rain with cloud seeding method. It is a known idea and had been experimented. So, weather modification is not an impossible option.

"In my words, "Contrails don't cause weather, weather causes contrails.""
Above is a wrong conclusion, without aeroplane, there would be no contrails. Contrails is man made, weather can not cause contrails. Weather is only a supporting factor, but this may be wrong too because trails also observed on unfavorable weather. Even some scientist puzzled by the existance of trails that last for hours in an impossible condition.

See my other post for reference.

"Normal persistent contrails can and do provide cirrus clouds which can block some sunlight and UV radiation, but their global coverage is miniscule."
Trails is severe problem. Many people report with photos and videos showing how the sky to become fully covered with clouds or trails dense enough to block the sun. And blocking sun for days can have severe health effects.

"-Global Warming Mitigation"
Some scientific reference mention how most scientist agree that contrails and contrail cirrus promote regional warming. And also this is concluded on observation that include only a handfull of trails in the sky. Should the observation is done during fully covered sky with trails, scientist would conclude that they promote global warming significantly too.

Even ordinary contrails have significant contribution to global warming. It is not important to differentiate chemtrail and contrails. None is harmless.

"-Visual Obscuration"
Proof exists that show sky is completely covered by trails and cloud created by the trails. They can last for days and even weeks. Refuting te possibility of hiding activity is also speculation.

Trails currently unregulated. Trails can be regulated by monitoring each plane activity and rerouting flight. It is possible to do and do not compromise the safety of flight.

Seeing how tight the government regulate ground vehicle, the none existance regulation on contrails looks like a miracle. Police should chase after the plane that produce trails like how they chase us when our car produce smoke.

Wednesday, June 22, 2011

Debunking contrailscience contrails grid

Grid formation of trails is often used to indicate that the trails is sprayed deliberately. Chemtrail debunker do not leave this alone, like metioned bellow:

The link explained that grid happen because of the wind. The jetplane passing the same route but the wind blow the previous trail to previous position. Creating many trail that form a grid.

The explanation look logical, however, it leave out these phenomena:

1. Some people observed that the grid is made in random order. The trails is not sprayed in sequence but in random order. The next trails is always fill the sky that never been sprayed before with precision. With only this it is enough to dispell wind blowing trails theory, but there is more.

2. The trails is created very fast, in minutes. The wind should never has time to move the trails fast enough.

3. Grid still observed on no wind condition. It is often seen that the trails do not move position. If grid is formed by the wind then the trails should be moving. But the grid still seen even if the trails stay at their location. The jetplane that spraying the trails definitely use different route.

4. The grid also seen to has even distance between one trail to the others. This precision can only happen if the spraying is done deliberately.

5. The wind theory can not explain why there are criss crossing trails.

All the above reason show that wind can not be used to explain the grid formed by the trails. Indicating that the spraying may indeed deliberate.

Debunking contrailscience trails age

Trails age has become the argumentation key point between chemtrail believer and chemtrail nay sayer. The debunker often use the natural life expectancy of ice. Like mentioned bellow:

However, trails from jet plane is not natural. Many science literature only mention probable life expectancy of trails of under 30 minutes. Trails that has life of hours is never been observed in situ, always from satellite observation. And trails that last for hours never been sampled to my knowledge.

This is example of observation:

On the Transition of Contrails into Cirrus Clouds
Following different jet aircraft during more than 60 occasions, contrails older than about 10–15 min could only be identified and sampled in very few cases. This raises the question whether very low concentrations of upper-tropospheric ice crystals frequently occur under conditions that are also favorable for contrails to form and persist.

People who often see chemtrails crisscrossing the sky would find this amusing, because they often report many trails last for many hours. Those scientist may never get trails that last for hours if they kept following the plane. Or they would not be allowed to follow.....

Trails of jet plane should never be compared with other natural phenomena. Water is only a part of what jet engine exhaust produce. There are other thing that can alter the way the contrails produced.

Aircraft engines emit water vapor, carbon dioxide (CO2), small amounts of nitrogen oxides (NOx), hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, sulfur gases, and soot and metal particles formed by the high-temperature combustion of jet fuel during flight. Of these emittants, only water vapor is necessary for contrail formation. Sulfur gases are also of potential interest because they lead to the formation of small particles. Particles suitable for water droplet formation are necessary for contrail formation. Initial contrail particles, however, can either be already present in the atmosphere or formed in the exhaust gas.

Trails from unnatural sources should never be explained by something from natural sources. The explanation from the link above should never be considered real.

What scientist can model is contrails that last for 30 minutes at most. Contrails that last for hours is impossible for them. They can not simulate or explain it using only jet engine exhaust output.

This should bring enough hint that hourly persistent contrails may not be contrails at all.

Also remember that the photos posted on contrailscience website may not be the photos of plane that actually produce trails that last hours. What being shown as what you see, may not be the same thing as what you actually see at all.

Tuesday, June 21, 2011

Debunking contrailscience broken contrails

People often see the trails of jetplane to be suddenly on and off. Many people use this as example that the trails is a deliberate spraying.

Chemtrail debunker consider this only as a results of sudden atmospheric change. Like mentioned bellow:

The explanation seems reasonable. But still leave a lot of question:

1. Atmosphere is random, but why the trails is perfectly on and perfectly off if it is caused by supposed to be random atmospheric condition?

A natural sky whould produce random level of humidity. If there is no wind, extreme humidity difference should not exist. We should expect to see gradual change to the trails.

But that is not what many people see. Many people see the trails to be very very uniform. The sudden cut is then continue with another very very uniform trails. If trails is created because of humidity, this would never happen.

2. Some people also observe that there are two trails with different place of broken trails. This defeat the theory that trails interrupted because of different humidity at different level of height.

If the sky is completely random at that time then we should see random broken trails every where, but many people don't see this.

If the sky completely homogen at that time then we should see two broken trails happen at the same place, but many people don't see this.

In short, this is not simple. People or even scientist observe effect can not be explained with atmospheric change of humidity.

Ocean acidification by BP Gulf Oil spill

Many people mention danger of BP Gulf oil spill by its direct effects. Namely how the animal is caught out in the oil. How coral reef is dying by the covering oil.

You can see more info on wiki:

However, most overlook the fact that the attempt to clear out the oil spill is using bactery that known to produce acid. There are many video that mention how the agent used is "eating" metal. That is a sign of acid!

So not only by the oil, pollution also happen because of the attempt to clear the oil. And it is ocean acidification.

Can you imagine how much acidification will happen with so many oil covering the sea? It wouldn't be unsignificant.

If you follow Global warming movement, you will notice that ocean acidification is big problem need to be solved from CO2 pollution. Ocean acidification destroy coral reef and eventualy will also destroy the one at the top of food cycle, us.

You can read more info on the effects of ocean acidification on this pdf bellow:
Impacts of Ocean Acidification on Coral Reefs and Other Marine Calcifiers

Ocean acidification is big concern in global warming movement, now it made worse by the attempt to remove oil spill. Maybe it is better to leave it alone than to allow those people to try to clean it but will introduce another problem.

God bless us.

Monday, June 20, 2011

Contrails, an ignored environmental problem

I think it is weird not many people consider contrails and the cloud it create, contrail cirrus, as very potential environmental problem. Some of the article bellow explain the problem.

A magazine from Volvo Aero about the environmental impact of fying, 2011
Air traffic does more damage as emissions are discharged at high altitude.

This is one of the fundamental climate problems for air traffic. When jet propulsion fuel is combusted at an altitude of 10,000 metres, the effect on the climate is greater than it would be if the fuel were combusted on the earth’s surface. The climatic effect of air traffc is due not simply to carbon emissions but also to other factors, such as emissions at high altitude of water vapour, nitrogen oxide and particulates.

Emissions trading in International civil aviation
At cruise altitude, apart from CO2 it is above all NOx, water vapour, contrails and cirrus clouds that contribute towards the greenhouse effect. Of these, only CO2 is included in the Kyoto Protocol. The radiative forcing of CO2 represents only a little more than one-third (37 %) of the total radiative effect of all climate-impacting avia-tion emissions (Lee/Sausen 2000).

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).

In a Special Report of the IPCC (1999), climatic impact was investigated and compared for three periods of observation (1992, 2015 and 2050). In the case of CO2, not only were aviation emissions at these points in time considered, but also the emissions that have accumulated since 1950. With contrails, on the other hand, only emissions from 1992, 2015 and 2050 were considered on account of their short retention time. 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.

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 the formation of cirrus clouds that would not form in the absence of air traffic (3; 4; 5).

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 cir rus clouds have the potential to cause a radiative forcing which exceeds the radiative forcing of all other emissions due to air traffic combined.

Rolls-Royce Aviation Power in the air
Carbon emissions have a direct and widely recognised effect on climate change. However, flying also creates other impacts. Along with CO2, aircraft engines produce emissions of water vapour and oxides of nitrogen. Water vapour in the engine exhaust under certain conditions can form contrails and these may evolve into cirrus clouds.

Glenn Research Center
Contrails contribute to the phenomenon known as "global change." Right now this effect is small, but it is growing. Although scientists are uncertain about the impact of contrails on global change, they believe that persistent contrails, those that last longer than a few minutes, gradually develop into cirrus clouds. Over the past 40 years, cloudiness seems to have increased. If this is in fact true, then this continual increase in cloudiness may lead to global climate change because it will change the amount of radiation entering and leaving the Earth's atmosphere. This characteristic of aircraft engine exhaust may act in a way similar to the effects produced by greenhouse gases.

Global radiative forcing from contrail cirrus
Aviation makes a significant contribution to anthropogenic climate forcing. The impacts arise from emissions of greenhouse gases, aerosols and nitrogen oxides, and from changes in cloudiness in the upper troposphere. An important but poorly understood component of this forcing is caused by ‘contrail cirrus’—a type of cloud that consist of young line-shaped contrails and the older irregularly shaped contrails that arise from them. Here we use a global climate model that captures the whole life cycle of these man-made clouds to simulate their global coverage, as well as the changes in natural cloudiness that they induce. We show that the radiative forcing associated with contrail cirrus as a whole is about nine times larger than that from line-shaped contrails alone. We also find that contrail cirrus cause a significant decrease in natural cloudiness, which partly offsets their warming effect. Nevertheless, net radiative forcing due to contrail cirrus remains the largest single radiative-forcing component associated with aviation. Our findings regarding global radiative forcing by contrail cirrus will allow their effects to be included in studies assessing the impacts of aviation on climate and appropriate mitigation options.

I hope by now you understand that it is not CO2 that can contribute to global warming. Contrails and cirrus contrails have large contribution too.

Sadly the current policy for contrails is:
Epa - contrails
Currently, there are no regulations addressing contrails and their atmospheric effects.

This is very sad. They enforce very tight CO2 control to the point of making many had become unemployed also industries and countries has to deal with very limited carbon credits.

And yet, they don't enforce the same enforcing effort to remedy contrails and contrail cirrus.

We should ask the government to at least monitor every airplane for their trails history. It would be better if government also willing to actually regulate trails from the airplane.

Chemtrail is actually contrail?

Link bellow have many articles that explain how chemtrail is not exist. And what we see is actually contrails.

It explain in full confidence about how contrails will form from a jet engine. While the explanation seems logical, notice that it is lack of quote. All the explanation comes from the writer own opinion.

Because of that, we have to consider all explanation in that website to be the opinion of one person only. He provide quote and link here and there but all of that do not directly answer the topic but only mention fact that can be used in any other way.

Scientist is not even sure how contrails happen. They can't even model it properly. Many are still trying to grasp of what happen. From time to time they notice anomaly which is surely will not be mentioned on the above website.

Article bellow mention anomaly of creation of contrail above critical temperature:
Measurement of the growth of the ice budget in a persisting contrail

The measured water mass within the contrail was found to be four orders of magnitude greater than that computed as a combustion product

Appleman was the first to develop criteria for contrail formation over a wide range of altitudes, temperatures and humidities. An essential result of his study was the prediction of wether water saturation is reached following the mixing of the exhaust heat and water vapor with the ambient air. His treatment describes the change in mixing ratio (decrease) in the aircraft wake as bein proportional to the change in wake temperature (decrease) with the proportionality constant fuel-dependent only. With any given fuel there results a critical temperature for each altitude above which contrail formation is impossible. In order that the contrail be visible a temperature as much as several degrees bellow the critical temperature is generally required.

In this experiment, as shown in Fig. 5, we actually observed the contrail to form and grow at a temperature several degrees above the critical temperature as defined by appleman, or the laboratory contrail studies of Pillie and Jiusto.

Article bellow mention anomaly of contrails that last for hours, many other article also mention contrails life of in situ sampling is under 30 minutes:
On the Transition of Contrails into Cirrus Clouds
Although several model studies concerning the formation and evolution of cirrus clouds and contrails have been performed (Starr and Cox 1985; Heymsfield and
Sabin 1989; Sassen and Dodd 1989; Jensen et al. 1994; De Mott et al. 1994; Ka ¨rcher et al. 1996; Gierens 1996; Gierens and Jensen 1998), the detailed processes are far from being understood by now, mainly due to the few observational data available. New in situ and remote

Contrails older than a few minutes proved to be difficult to sample in situ because such contrails, even if visible from far below or aloft, are in most of the cases difficult to recognize and thus to follow while flying on the same level. In most of the cases the optical contrast to the environment was very low. Following different jet aircraft during more than 60 occasions, contrails older than about 10–15 min could only be identified and sampled in very few cases. This raises the question whether very low concentrations of upper-tropospheric ice crystals frequently occur under conditions that are also favorable for contrails to form and persist.

Mention how contrails produce two kind of cirrus clouds:
In both cases two modes can be distinguished: one cloud mode around Dm
5 15–20 mm (Cf: 10 mm) and a second one toward submicron sizes to the left, which we call ‘‘haze mode.’’

Environmental conditions required for contrail formation and persistence
Contrails are frequently visible at distances as close as 25-35 m behind the aircraft engines. Using an analytical model of ice crystal growth in the exhaust plume, showed that the number density of ice crystals nucleated must be at least about 10^4cm^-3 in order for the contrail to be visible this quickly...... The simulations suggest that freshly nucleated sulfuric acid/water aerosols could not grow large enough to spontaneously freeze in the time required.

People who debunk chemtrail mention that scientist consider it as contrail. However some quote above show that even scientist are not sure of what they observe.

Friday, June 10, 2011

Stopping chemtrail by talking?

Chemtrail will be explained in detail next time. What intrigued me to write today is how people thought that you can do something for something so global just by talking.

Chemtrail is something that happen all over the world. People report observing plane that create trail everywhere. While the rate is difference from places to places, many people post photos and video of their observation from different part of the world.

And yet, some people think that they can prevent spraying just talking to receptionist of government building at his town. Ok, this is may be too extreme example, but who knows that people actually do this too.

I don't think you can stop chemtrailing even if we can talk to the leader of your country.

With the scale that big, the leader of your country must already receive information from their staff. If they still do not announce anything and the chemtrail still happen to the people then that can be something that even they can not handle.

If the one that spray the chemtrail can do this globally, wouldn't they have something to be used to face each country leader?

If you explain everything and they still deny it then you must think of possibility of they already knew but choose to pretend not knowing. May be to protect their family, or to protect their country, or to protect their work, or to protect their huge income.

Sorry guys, I don't think talking to a government higher ups can change anything. You may just waste money or time. Maybe by creating larger awareness to people can help. But if just convincing a friend of yours is very hard, then how can you expect to convince a stranger?

I would consider a more direct action. Not by talking but by creating something that would prevent chemtrail from achieving its purposes. I choose to made cemenite.

I do not care if my family, my neighboor or my friend do not believe me. I would satisfy enough if they do not have to suffer as much as the people at other places having similar chemtrail problem. I don't need to make hundreds and I can made it with the same budget as transport to government higher ups...

Don't waste your money talking or convincing other people, use it to prevent the effect instead.

Monday, June 6, 2011

Getting energy with voltage without current

"Voltage without current" is a word commonly heard in "free energy" community. It usually refer to Tom Bearden saying of not to destroy the dipole. We get the energy but the dipole (the charge) do not leak or discharge.

It means that to get free energy from an electronic circuit we have to use only voltage but should never use any current. We allow the voltage the flow but before any current getting trough we stop it.

Well, this is another bullshit theory.

First, many potential "free energy" device that using battery always use current. And using current means destroying the dipole. Without current we can not make the coil to produce eletromagnetic field, no power to do anything, no power to ionize, no power to electrolize, etc. Power is multiplication of voltage AND current. Without current there will be no power.

If there is supposed to be a door of free energy somewhere, we need power to open this door. Without power, no chance to open the door.

Second, it is impossible to tell transistor to only voltage but not allowing the current. There is simply no transistor can do that fast enough. Using mechanical also have similar limitation.

Voltage without current is bullshit.

Free energy?

Many people mistaken the term "free energy" as energy that you can get for free. Well, that is wrong.

At least you need to buy the device that provide you with "free energy".

Then you may need to maintenance it or prepare budget to make it work continuously.

Then some of "free energy" device hide fact that they consume or get consumed. This is especially true for "run on water" solution. Not just it need expensive kind of water, it also has short runtime because the device electrode is consumed.

The durability is something the inventor rarely tell you. This also hide the actual cost of the energy when you need to replace it.

Even solar cell is not cheap. Just calculate the investment you need to get electricity for your house for two years and then compare it how many you currently spent. Why two years? this considering the fact that your may be clueless and may end up with short life cheapskate solution.

This is the same with hydro.

But the bottom line is, you can not get energy for free. Either you have to spent money to get it or at least to spent a lot of time to prevent being scammed.

Friday, June 3, 2011

Cellphone and brain cancer

WHO just admit that cellphone may cause brain cancer. This may surprise some of you. Should you stop using cellphone now? What you can do?

I believe that what make cellphone dangerous is not emf, so I think any solution using emf prevention will be USELESS. Many people think that cellphone is dangerous because it work close to gigahertz frequency. Other think it is the level of EM radiation that it became dangerous.

But I don't think both assumption are correct. Both are wrong. Device that work on gigahertz frequency already exist for sometime and people who work at telecomunication center do not suffer brain cancer worse than everyone else. If giga hertz and EMF level is the cause, don't you think cellphone R&D or people who work around cellphone tower will get the brain cancer first?

And yet, they don't. If brain cancer case is not proportional with gigahertz and EMF level environment exposure, then blaming it on electro-magnetic is a bullshit.

I believe that the true solution lies on the orgone property of the cellphone. Which I think happen to be the worse kind because of lack of attention from the researcher of cellphone safety. They don't even acknowledge it exist so I doubt they will fix it anytimes later.

Because of that, we have to do it our own. Fortunately we can prevent brain cancer by using device that produce good orgone, the kind of orgone that is opposite of what cellphone produce. It is also cheap. I only spent less than $2 to make it. You can make it yourself too. But becarefull because you can also endup boosting the cellphone effect to the worse.

My solution is called cemenite. Just google it.

Friday, May 27, 2011

Anti radiation food, do they really work?

After Fukushima nuclear reactor meltdown, there are many method of countering the effect of radiation from our body. From the ridiculous to some smart idea. What I want to talk right now is the food method.

Many are suggesting baking soda, spirulina, vitamin C, and many else. This food do this, that food do that. All combined can clean yourself from radiation and bla bla bla bla ....

One big question remain. Do they really work?

I get many link about how to counter radiation with food. But so far I don't see a SINGLE one that show EVIDENCE. All of them are just talking without laboratory data. What the hell?

Ok, no evidence or lab testing. How about testimony? Some people can deal with testimony. Well, the testimony is ZERO too. No one ever refer to a successfull Chernobyl or Hiroshima Bomb cancer success story with some food for instance. A Chernobyl victim tell me that when the food become contaminated, all is useless. That make sense, radiation can mutate everything including drug or food.

Preach me all you want but I think all the article about using food to counter radio active is scam. If the writer of the anti radiation recipe is so confident, why don't they give some to the kamikaze worker at fukushima. Or better, show how good their solution is by walking inside 20 km restriction zone at Fukushima armed with their food. I am warning them though, the food may mutate before even entering their mouth.

Why we shouldn't stop water fluoridation now.

Chlorine Fluoride is a compound that we should refer as a whole:

It is one thing not two. Any website mention it as separate thing is bullshitting. Example:

If you remove the fluoride, you remove the chlorine. Chlorine Fluoride said to be toxic, but without it water will be contaminated with a lot of germs guaranteed to make you sick. Pathogen bacteria will invade the water, and produce a lot more damage than what chlorine fluoride capable of, enough to kill you much faster.

The reason for the "flouride" is the chlorine, it is not to prevent tooth decay. Our ancestor have a great teeth to their old age. Site that promote tooth decay as something important is bullshitting:

If fluoride is as good as they say, then why we see new dental paste invention each year? There are more and more doubt surfacing about fluoride use:

Chlorine fluoride is dangerous, the proof is they are trying to limit it's concentration. Having safety level means the thing is dangerous if you take too many.

However, keep in mind that Chlorine fluoride is in the tap water to prevent much more dangerous sick causing bactery from invading the water. The correct action is not to remove it but to REPLACE it with better or safer method. If you intend to remove the fluoride from the water then you must make sure that you are not allowing more dangerous pathogen to enter the water.

Unfortunately finding alternative of Chlorine fluoride is hard. It usually take a lot of investment. Our water system today use ignorant science that they actually promote the build up of pathogen bactery. Aware science propose the use of kangen water, copper pipe tubing or Viktor Schauberger method of transferring water.

Unfortunately, above solution still not ready yet. You have to stuck on using Chlorine fluoride stripper:

Either way, we waste more money and more energy just to get healthy water because of how ignorant our science is to the health.

Wednesday, May 25, 2011

See the world

We often see the world through what we think. That is natural. We can get a lot of truth that way.

However, what if what you see or hear is not all of what happen? Would you still think that you know it all?

Unfortunately, the world is like that. There are people that do not want you to see all the bad thing or even a good thing that happen around you. There are people that carefully choose what you will see and hear. There are people who get benefit from what you don't know.

No one know it all, but sadly there are people that prevent us from know it all.

What I want to tell here is something you may not know. Something that can help you get better life but may be obscured to you. A solution or two, hopefully without too many rant of mine.