new illuminati: chemtrails

Showing posts with label chemtrails. Show all posts

Tuesday, 6 September 2016

Atmospheric scientists say ‘no chemtrails’

Seventy six of 77 atmospheric scientists responding to a survey agree these are contrails, not

Seventy-six of 77 atmospheric scientists responding to a survey agree these are contrails – composed primarily of water in the form of ice crystals – not “chemtrails.”

By Deborah Byrd

Is there a large-scale, secret program to spray chemicals into Earth’s atmosphere, resulting in “chemtrails?” Leading atmospheric scientists just say no.

Seventy-six of 77 atmospheric scientists responding to a survey agree these are contrails – composed primarily of water in the form of ice crystals – not “chemtrails.”

Have you heard there’s a large-scale secret plan to spray chemicals into Earth’s atmosphere and that the resulting streaks across the sky are called chemtrails? In 2011, nearly 17% of people surveyed internationally said they believed this was true, or partly true. Now we learn, however, that atmospheric scientists are not among the believers. On August 12, 2016, scientists announced results of an international survey of leading atmospheric scientists. Seventy-six of the 77 scientists responding to the survey said they had not encountered evidence of a secret spraying program and agreed that well-understood physical and chemical processes can easily explain alleged “evidence” of chemtrails, often presented in the form of photos like the one at the top of this page.

The team surveyed two groups of experts: atmospheric chemists who specialize in condensation trails and geochemists working on atmospheric deposits of dust and pollution. Their findings are published in a peer-reviewed journal, Environmental Research Letters.

The survey’s authors say theirs is the first peer-reviewed journal paper addressing the chemtrail conspiracy theory. Financial support for it came from the University of California, Irvine, the Carnegie Institution for Science and a group called Near Zero, which is a 501c3 non-profit that produces scientific assessments of energy and climate issues. Atmospheric scientist Ken Caldeira – who is an author on the survey – told me that Near Zero is partially funded by Bill Gates, but he said Gates played no role in choosing this study topic.

Multiple contrails in an area with high airline traffic, via NOAA. The survey team said: “The experts we surveyed resoundingly rejected contrail photographs and test results as evidence of a large-scale atmospheric conspiracy.”

The research team said it wanted to respond to the large number of people who say they believe in a secret spraying program. In recent years, websites – such as globalskywatch.com – have claimed to show evidence of this spraying. And yet team members said they aren’t trying to change the minds of those who believe in chemtrails. They say that’s probably not possible, since all statements from experts to the contrary of this particular conspiracy theory tend to be taken by believers as just more evidence of the conspiracy. Instead, said study co-author Steven J. Davis of UC Irvine:

We wanted to establish a scientific record on the topic of secret atmospheric spraying programs for the benefit of those in the public who haven’t made up their minds.

Ken Caldeira said:

'… what some people think are ‘chemtrails’ are just ordinary contrails, which are becoming more abundant as air travel expands. Also, it is possible that climate change is causing contrails to persist for longer periods than they used to.'

I felt it was important to definitively show what real experts in contrails and aerosols think.

The video below features Stephen Davis talking about the study:

If you want to learn more about the results of Davis, Caldeira and colleagues’ recent survey, read the study published in Environmental Research Letters.

Or you might want to click over to Davis’ webpage on the subject, which contains, among other things, a more complete explanation of the diagram below.

Note they are using the acronym SLAP, which stands for “secret, large-scale atmospheric program.”

Presented with 4 different images of trails behind aircraft (a-d), experts uniformly responded that a secret, large-scale atmospheric spraying program (SLAP) was not the most parsimonious explanation for the depicted phenomena (pie charts). In each case, the stacked bars show the experts’ most common alternative explanations.

View larger. | In the survey, scientists were presented with 4 different images of trails behind aircraft (a-d). They experts uniformly responded that a secret, large-scale atmospheric spraying program (SLAP) did not meet the test of Occam’s razor; that is, it’s not the simplest explanation for the depicted phenomena (pie charts). In each case, the stacked bars show the experts’ most common alternative explanations. Find more information about this diagram via study co-author Stephen J. Davis.

At EarthSky, we often read comments from our audience about chemtrails, especially when we post photos of atmospheric sky phenomena, such as iridescent clouds, which by the way are caused by especially small water droplets or ice crystals in the air and which were described in a 1954 classic book on wondrous things to see in the sky.

The comments at EarthSky frequently show chemtrail believers as lacking in basic knowledge about Earth’s atmosphere. In fact, our world’s atmosphere shifts and changes in subtle and unsubtle ways from one day to the next, and even hourly, depending on factors such as wind, humidity, temperature, height above ground and so on.

Les Cowley of the great website Atmospheric Optics – which explains optical sky phenomena such as halos, rainbows, glories, and much more – told me that he hears from chemtrail believers, too. At his website, he answers the question of why people may perceive contrails as looking “different” now than they used to:

Are there more contrails than there used to be? Yes, aircraft movements have considerably increased.

But there is another reason – Paradoxically, modern aircraft with more fuel-efficient engines and airframes form contrails under a wider range of atmospheric conditions than did older airplanes.

Modern aircraft waste less of the fuel’s combustion heat in the exhaust gases. The resulting cooler plumes have a higher relative humidity and their moisture condenses more readily to form contrails.

This image shows is of a scientific trial (Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 4 (2000) 391-401 ‘Influence of propulsion efficiency on contrail formation’). On the left is a modern Airbus A340 – on the right is an old Boeing 707. The striped pole is the nose probe of the following research aircraft. The aircraft are flying under identical conditions. The Airbus produces contrails, the older 707 does not. Image and caption via Les Cowley at Atmospheric Optics.

By the way, you might be wondering, why? Why would there be a large-scale secret effort to spray chemicals into Earth’s atmosphere? What’s the purpose? The answer to that question has been has been morphing for years, too, from the first whisperings about chemtrails associated with the mark of the beast to “the government is doing is” or “corporations are doing it,” for reasons of population control or mind control or to make us all unhealthy.

We often hear of chemtrails nowadays associated with the term geoengineering, which scientists used to use mainly when imagining terraforming other worlds. By the early part of this century, some atmospheric scientists – including Ken Caldeira – wanted to discuss geoengineering techniques for Earth, in case we someday need a last-ditch effort to save the world from extreme climate change. Atmospheric scientists met and published on the subject; perhaps they still do. But as they discussed geoengineering’s pros and cons, many began to feel that because climate is so complex – with so much potential for known and unknown feedbacks – geoengineering would be dangerous and perhaps even foolhardy.

In recent years, I’ve seen clips of Caldeira speaking about geoengineering in videos about chemtrails. That’s not because he thinks they’re real (he doesn’t); the clips are taken out of context. I asked Caldeira how he felt about his words being used in this way, and he told me:

Some people believe I am a nefarious individual secretly commanding a fleet of airplanes.

This is very annoying, but the more I deal with these people, the less I am angry at them.

Chemtrail believers tend to be well-meaning, frightened people who feel powerless to control their own destiny. They lack the technical expertise needed to separate reality from fantasy.

A note of conclusion … what of the 77th scientist in the survey? Seventy-six said “no chemtrails,” but the 77th did not say that. Caldeira told me that 77th scientist found barium in an aerosol sample in an area where the soils didn’t have much barium. This could potentially be evidence supporting atmospheric spraying of barium, or it could be a poor data sample, or it could be an indication of another source of environmental barium, which is used in oil and gas drilling muds, automotive paints, stabilizers for plastics, case hardening steels, bricks, tiles, lubricating oils, and jet fuel as well as in various types of pesticides, and much more. Read here about the sources of environmental barium.

I asked Caldeira who the 77th scientist was, so I could contact him or her and ask more questions, but so far he hasn’t told me. If I find out … I’ll add a note here.

Bottom line: Leading atmospheric scientists were surveyed about whether they’ve heard of an on-going, large-scale, secret plan to spray chemicals into Earth’s atmosphere. The answer was a resounding no, and the scientists said ordinary physical and chemical processes in the atmosphere can account for the so-called “evidence” of so-called “chemtrails.”

From EarthSky @ http://earthsky.org/earth/atmospheric-scientists-say-no-chemtrails

For more information about chemtrails see http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com/search/label/chemtrails

- Scroll down through ‘Older Posts’ at the end of each section

Do you LIKE this uniquely informative site?

Hours of effort by a genuinely incapacitated invalid are required every day to maintain, write, edit, research, illustrate, moderate and publish this website from a tiny cabin in a remote forest.

Now that most people use ad blockers and view these posts on phones and other mobile devices, sites like this earn an ever shrinking pittance from advertising sponsorship. This site needs your help.

Like what you see? Please give anything you can -

Contribute any amount and receive at least one New Illuminati eBook!

(You can use a card securely if you don’t use Paypal)

Please click below -

And it costs nothing to share this post on Social Media!

Dare to care and share - YOU are our only advertisement!

Video - http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid106573614001?bckey=AQ~~,AAAAGKlf6FE~,iSMGT5PckNvcgUb_ru5CAy2Tyv4G5OW3&bctid=5081057743001

For further enlightening information enter a word or phrase into the random synchronistic search box @ the top left of http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com

And see

New Illuminati – http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com

New Illuminati on Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/the.new.illuminati

New Illuminati Youtube Channel - https://www.youtube.com/user/newilluminati/playlists

New Illuminati’s OWN Youtube Videos -

https://www.youtube.com/user/new1lluminati/videos

New Illuminati on Google+ @ For New Illuminati posts - https://plus.google.com/u/0/+RamAyana0/posts

and see https://plus.google.com/115562482213600937809/posts

and google.com/+newilluminati-channel

New Illuminati on Twitter @ www.twitter.com/new_illuminati

New Illuminati on Google Follow - http://www.google.com/friendconnect/settings/edit?smpl=true&st=e%3DAOG8GaCFDeBRZ1yDY2DjCaq61tFDiwO07s%252Fwv3x8%252B%252FJgZJTLx5igbMomJIu3796Ja6n05WaS8qnJ0DLyeGk1q49tLD8m%252FhV1K%252Bq%252BQIOGOwLeWznnm5IGhzjfWzVnq5I4UJr3fw8yk%252B8W2OqwlCbL7BNsW32uouSc79Br%252BkOZQ1Fpzg6J3KMIZkzmg0%252FcPHsWUPqZv845VKS31S%252FbCm8NpINhlK1kDxUdRmcCkT37dIc4RB6PNurjCcd2%252BVkNBveCm4kAgeb8A3Q5hNj6%252FHplvQxKFI%252BW1TYBJVYqHHTKsnBPGcL6wlZdxTUwtfxWU2ZvANJQ%252F%252FUrolBwP7ovb92SZqSWMFJRnN2rsQ%253D%253D%26c%3Dpeoplesense

New Illuminations –Art(icles) by R. Ayana @ http://newilluminations.blogspot.com

The Her(m)etic Hermit - http://hermetic.blog.com

DISGRUNTLED SITE ADMINS PLEASE NOTE –

We provide a live link to your original material on your site (and links via social networking services) - which raises your ranking on search engines and helps spread your info further!

This site is published under Creative Commons (Attribution) CopyRIGHT (unless an individual article or other item is declared otherwise by the copyright holder). Reproduction for non-profit use is permitted & encouraged - if you give attribution to the work & author and include all links in the original (along with this or a similar notice).

Feel free to make non-commercial hard (printed) or software copies or mirror sites - you never know how long something will stay glued to the web – but remember attribution!

If you like what you see, please send a donation (no amount is too small or too large) or leave a comment – and thanks for reading this far…

Live long and prosper! Together we can create the best of all possible worlds…

From the New Illuminati – http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com

Friday, 12 February 2016

Scientists Say Airplane Contrails May Be Accidentally Geoengineering the Climate

http://cdn.theantimedia.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/geoengineering-plane-contrails.jpg

by Derrick Broze

Researchers with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration are suggesting contrails from airplanes may be inadvertently geoengineering the skies.

Chuck Long is a researcher with the Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences (CIRES) at the NOAA Earth System Research Laboratory at the University of Colorado in Boulder. At the recent American Geophysical Union Fall Meeting, Long and his team released their paper, “Evidence of Clear-Sky Daylight Whitening: Are we already conducting geoengineering?” The analysis found that vapor from airplanes may be altering the climate through accidental geoengineering.

According to a 2013 congressional report:

“The term ‘geoengineering’ describes this array of technologies that aim, through large-scale and deliberate modifications of the Earth’s energy balance, to reduce temperatures and counteract anthropogenic climate change. Most of these technologies are at the conceptual and research stages, and their effectiveness at reducing global temperatures has yet to be proven. Moreover, very few studies have been published that document the cost, environmental effects, socio-political impacts, and legal implications of geoengineering. If geoengineering technologies were to be deployed, they are expected to have the potential to cause significant transboundary effects.

“In general, geoengineering technologies are categorized as either a carbon dioxide removal (CDR) method or a solar radiation management (SRM) method. CDR methods address the warming effects of greenhouse gases by removing carbon dioxide (CO2) from the atmosphere. CDR methods include ocean fertilization, and carbon capture and sequestration. SRM methods address climate change by increasing the reflectivity of the Earth’s atmosphere or surface.

“Aerosol injection and space-based reflectors are examples of SRM methods. SRM methods do not remove greenhouse gases from the atmosphere, but can be deployed faster with relatively immediate global cooling results compared to CDR methods.”

Long and his team were investigating the changing amounts of sunlight that reach our planet, processes known as “brightening” or “dimming.” According to CIRES, “Brightening and dimming are overly simplified words that signify increases and decreases in how much light from the Sun (measured as “irradiance” in watts/m2) reaches the planet’s surface — and these measurements are often analyzed under cloud-free conditions.”

In the new study, Long suggests high-altitude “ice haze” may be responsible for a whitish tint to the blue sky. “I’m talking about a sub-visual contrail-generated haze of ice, which we do not classify as a cloud but gives blue sky more of a whitish tint,” Long told CIRES.

“Contrail” is the name for the thin, line-shaped “clouds” sometimes produced by aircraft flying at altitudes several miles above the Earth. The trails are produced from water, turned into ice crystals, and can last several seconds, minutes, or possibly hours. These crystals leave behind a thin, icy haze, scattering the sun’s light in a way similar to Solar Radiation Management geoengineering projects. Long’s research may prove geoengineering is already taking place, albeit inadvertently.

More research is needed before Long can conclusively show much of an effect contrails are having on the climate, or whether they are leading to cooling or warming. However, Long says this is another way humans are altering the climate and, he says, “you can see this with your own eyes.”

One reason this story is peculiar relates to the controversy over whether geoengineering programs are already active. This is what is derogatorily called the “Chemtrails Conspiracy.” Essentially, some believe geoengineering is actively taking place in our skies, and the “contrails” are actually geoengineering programs covertly being carried out. The “chemtrails” label comes from the portion of the crowd that believes these programs are delivering dangerous chemical additives to the food, water, soil, and humans below for nefarious purposes.

Regardless of where you stand, it’s important to know the United States government has a history of weather modification. In a 1996 document entitled “Weather as a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather by 2025,” the U.S. Air Force discussed a number of proposals for using weather as a weapon. The Environmental Modification Treaty was signed by the United States and other nations to halt global weather modification.

But the government did not simply research these ideas. It actually implemented them — prior to its official musings on whether it could. During the Vietnam War, the U.S. government operated covert weather modification programs under Operation Popeye. The government does not only experiment with technology in foreign countries; it likes to try it at home, as well. In 2012, it was revealed that the U.S. Army sprayed toxic chemicals over the skies of St. Louis without informing the public.

Anti-Media also recently reported on Professor Alan Robock’s theory that the Central Intelligence Agency is using the weather as a weapon of war.

So are geoengineering programs already active? Perhaps what Chuck Long and his team are noticing is not that standard contrails are causing geoengineering, but that geoengineering programs are already live and changing the climate.

Indeed, at least one previous study has found that geoengineering could cause the white haze and loss of blue skies that Long is observing. According to a report by the New Scientist, Ben Kravitz of the Carnegie Institution for Science has shown that releasing sulphate aerosols high in the atmosphere would scatter sunlight into the atmosphere. He says this could decrease the amount of sunlight that hits the ground by 20%, as well as make the sky appear more hazy.

Ironically, the promotion of geoengineering might actually cause more harm than good, including an increase in droughts. In February 2015, an international committee of scientists released a report stating that geoengineering techniques are not a viable alternative to reducing greenhouse gas emissions to combat the effects of climate change. The committee report called for further research and understanding of various geoengineering techniques, including carbon dioxide removal schemes and solar-radiation management before implementation.

The scientists found that Solar Radiation Management, or albedo-modification techniques, are likely to present “serious known and possible unknown environmental, social, and political risks, including the possibility of being deployed unilaterally.” The report was sponsored by the National Academy of Sciences, the U.S. intelligence community, NASA, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the U.S. Department of Energy.

According to a 2013 study published in the Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, if geoengineering programs were started and then suddenly halted, the planet could see an immediate rise in temperatures, particularly over land. The study, titled, “The Impact of Abrupt Suspension of Solar Radiation Management,” seems to indicate that once geoengineering begins, the programs cannot be suspended without causing the very problem the engineering was intended to solve.

On the heels of the Paris Climate Conference, the topic of geoengineering is a contentious one. Dan Farber, professor of law at Berkeley University, recently suggested the only way the world can hope to achieve the conference’s goal of holding the global temperature decrease “well below” 2°C would be to implement geoengineering programs “such as injecting aerosols into the stratosphere or solar mirrors.”

“I’m not particularly a fan of geoengineering, and I will be happy to be wrong about this,” Farber wrote. “Otherwise, though, if we are serious about those temperature targets, we may end up with little other choice than layering some geoengineering efforts on top of aggressive emission cuts.”

What are your thoughts? Do you believe geoengineering programs are active? Do you believe they are necessary to save the planet from destruction? Leave your comments below.

From The AntiMedia @ http://theantimedia.org/scientists-say-airplane-contrails-may-be-accidentally-geoengineering-the-climate/

Debunked: Chemtrails and Chemclouds

(8:09)

Pilots Debunk Chemtrails

(14:47)