chemtrails.cc

I’m reposting this propaganda for one reason.  Occasionally I see WW2-era pictures of propeller planes forming thick contrails; even what appear to be persistent chemtrails.   The obvious question to ask is ‘If chemtrails are formed by a jet fuel additive, how do you explain these pictures of thick contrails in old photos of propeller planes?’

The answer is simple.  Lead.  These old propeller planes used lead (tetra ethyl lead) in the fuel as an anti-knock agent.  It doesn’t particularly matter (no pun intended) which metallic aerosol is present in the exhaust.  The nucleation sites still increase water droplet and ice crystal formation and reduce their tendency to evaporate/sublimate into invisible gas in dry high altitude air.  Of course water vapor is a major byproduct of hydrocarbon combustion so if there are nucleation sites present, the water will tend to condense and persist in visible droplets or ice crystals more than if the fuel were clean burning with fewer nucleation sites.

Climate pimps like the UK Met will rarely acknowledge metallic aerosols  when discussing persistent contrail formation.  They will only refer to “vapor trails.”  But the MET is closely connected to UK’s Ministry of Defense, so it’s assumed everything they publish will have some propaganda value.  Why did they choose a picture of old propeller planes forming contrails, not satellite photos like these or modern jet aircraft that better illustrate the scope of the chemtrail program?

——————————–

“Global dimming” contains a lot of global warming alarmism with scary music and utterly fails to connect the dots with regard to chemtrails.  What’s important to take from this is the 10-30% global reduction in solar irradiance largely due to aircraft aerosol.

It always astounds me that so many climatologists refuse to entertain the notion that there’s more than just vapor in these “vapor trails.”

I can’t even watch the rest of this overly-dramatic tripe.  When scientists talk about runaway global warming why do they never mention evaporative cooling?  Earth’s surface is 2/3 water.  This isn’t Venus.  Water evaporation must have a limiting effect on greenhouse warming.

By Clara Moskowitz,
Science News

posted: 14 September 2009 12:21 pm ET

A rocket experiment set to launch Tuesday aims to create artificial clouds at the outermost layers of Earth’s atmosphere.

The project, called the Charged Aerosol Release Experiment (CARE), plans to trigger cloud formation around the rocket’s exhaust particles. The clouds are intended to simulate naturally-occurring phenomena called noctilucent clouds, which are the highest clouds in the atmosphere.

“This is really essentially at the boundary of space,” said Wayne Scales, a scientist at Virginia Tech who will use computer models to study the physics of the artificial dust cloud as it’s released. “Nothing like this has been done before and that’s why everybody’s really excited about it.”

The experiment is the first attempt to create artificial noctilucent clouds. A previous spacecraft, called Aeronomy of Ice in the Mesosphere (AIM), launched in 2007 to observe the natural clouds from space.

CARE is slated to launch Tuesday between 7:30 and 7:57 p.m. EDT (2330 and 2357 GMT) from NASA’s Wallops Flight Facility in Virginia.

Noctilucent means “night shining” in Latin. Although difficult to spot with the naked eye, the clouds are best visible when Earth’s surface is in darkness and sunlight from below the horizon illuminates the high-altitude clouds.

These clouds, also known as polar mesospheric clouds, are made of ice crystals. The natural ones tend to hover around 50 to 55 miles (80 to 90 km) above the Earth. CARE will release its dust particles a bit higher than that, then let them settle back down to a lower altitude.

“What the CARE experiment hopes to do is to create an artificial dust layer,” Scales told SPACE.com. “Hopefully it’s a creation in a controlled sense, which will allow scientists to study different aspects of it, the turbulence generated on the inside, the distribution of dust particles and such.”

CARE is a project of the Naval Research Laboratory and the Department of Defense Space Test Program. The spacecraft will launch aboard a NASA four-stage Black Brant XII suborbital sounding rocket.

Scientists will study its progress from ground based instruments as well as the STP/NRL STPSat-1 spacecraft in Earth orbit. Researchers will track the CARE dust cloud for days or even months to study its behavior and development over time.

Because the optical observations are crucial, the launch can only take place if the weather is clear both at the launch site and at multiple observation stations along the Atlantic coast and in Bermuda.

If CARE cannot launch Tuesday, the team can try again between Sept. 16 and Sept. 20.

This image shows one of the first ground sightings of noctilucent clouds in the 2007 season over Budapest, Hungary on June 15, 2007. Credit: Veres Viktor

Noctilucent clouds over Mt. Sabalan, a 15,784 ft extinct volcano in northwestern Iran. Credit: Siamak Sabet

Noctilucent clouds over northern Europe. Credit: Pekka Parvianien.

Night-shining clouds created after space shuttle launches may offer clues into the cause of the Tunguska event, a mysterious blast which rocked southern Siberia more than a century ago.

Thin clouds have appeared at abnormally high altitudes over polar regions following space shuttle launches on several occasions in the past decade. These noctilucent, or night-shining, clouds typically occur in summer and lie at altitudes of about 85 kilometers, in a layer of the atmosphere called the thermosphere, says Michael C. Kelley, an atmospheric physicist at Cornell University. Kelley and his colleagues suggest in the July 28 Geophysical Research Letters that data gleaned from analyses of these high-flying clouds, as well as knowledge about the speed at which shuttle exhaust wafted to polar regions, now hint that the Tunguska blast of June 1908 (SN: 6/21/08, p. 5) resulted from a comet slamming into Earth’s atmosphere.

Each launch of a space shuttle, which burns a combination of liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen as fuel, pumps about 300 metric tons of water vapor into the atmosphere at altitudes between 100 and 115 kilometers. Soon after the January 16, 2003, launch of the shuttle Columbia, a liftoff that took place just after the height of summer in the Southern Hemisphere, noctilucent clouds appeared over Antarctica. Similarly, a widespread display of the night-shining clouds showed up over Alaska two days after the shuttle Endeavour blasted off on August 8, 2007. Previous studies show that in both instances those clouds included material from the shuttle plumes.

“Conventional wisdom says that the plumes shouldn’t reach the poles that quickly, but they do,” Kelley notes. So sustained high-altitude winds must be carrying the plumes to the poles.

Michael S. Stevens, a research physicist at the Naval Research Laboratory in Washington, D.C., agrees: Experiments show that “winds can be strong at these altitudes, but they’re not well understood.”

Using data based on shuttle plume movement, the researchers suggest that the Tunguska blast could have been responsible for unusually bright noctilucent clouds over Europe soon thereafter. The likely composition of those clouds further suggests that a comet caused the blast.

Some of the thickest and brightest noctilucent clouds ever observed — ones that cast enough light to read a newspaper in the middle of the night — appeared over Europe on July 1, 1908, Kelley says. Not coincidentally, he and his colleagues argue, the Tunguska blast occurred over southern Siberia about 22 hours earlier. The team’s models suggest that winds and diffusion could have transported material from the site of the blast to the skies over London, a distance of about 5,000 kilometers, in little more than a day.

Scientists at the time suggested that the night-shining clouds over London were made of meteoritic dust. But those aerosols are typically too small to reflect sunlight efficiently, Kelley argues, suggesting the clouds above Europe were made of ice crystals. This assumption, along with the new analysis of shuttle plume movement, strongly suggests that the object that blazed into the atmosphere and disintegrated above Siberia was a moisture-rich comet rather than a relatively dry asteroid.

“That’s an interesting idea, and worth considering,” Stevens says. In an alternate scenario, he notes, rather than the moisture being transported to Europe and then coalescing into clouds, the clouds may have formed over Siberia and then been transported to the west.

HEY DUMBASS, ITS CALLED A CHEMBOW

A weird-looking cloud sporting the colors of the rainbow appeared to many in the Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex early Thursday afternoon.The cloud stayed in the southeastern sky for several minutes, but was obscured by other clouds at times. NBC 5 Meteorologist James Aydelott offered one possible explanation, saying that the sun was hitting the cloud at just the right angle, similar to a phenomenon known as “sun dogs,” causing the colorful display. He also said he had never seen a cloud like this before.

Perfectly normal, nothing to see here, move along.

Interesting discussion about this here:
http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/forum/msg86828.html

I see these on a regular basis now in Michigan. See previous post on diffraction and chembows.

If you’ve been paying attention to chemtrails, you may have observed rainbow smearing (diffraction) of light reflected off them.  Dark sunglasses can bring the subtle rainbows into the dynamic range of the human eye.  Chembows are often visible when the sunlight reflects at approximately 45• angle to the chemtrail.  Wikipedia entry on diffraction

A popular chembow image. Notice how only the wispy remnants of the chemtrail diffract the sunlight, not the clouds.

Diffraction is a quantum interaction between photons of light and edges of atoms.  When metallic surfaces have features smaller than a wavelength of visible light (nanometer scale),  different wavelengths will be reflected at different angles.  When features are ordered in a linear pattern (such as on a DVD optical disc), a rainbow will appear.

Illustration of white light diffracting off a metallic diffraction grating

In the rain, or other atmospheric conditions where water droplets are large enough, rainbows appear due to refraction.  Atmospheric refraction (such as from a rainbow in a rainstorm) is a similar phenomenon to chemtrail diffraction.  Its important to note, however, that rainbows can be seen in light reflected off chemtrails, not only refracted from behind, which may occur under other atmospheric conditions, such as the presence of large ice crystals or droplets.

More examples of chembows:

Dark sky indicates reduced exposure, necessary to bring rainbow into dynamic range of the sensor.

Filamentous wisps may indicate presence of heavier-than-water particulate aerosol. Pink and green dominate the rainbow, matching emission spectra of barium.