Military Jets Spray Chemtrails While Flying in Close Formation 5

USAF Academy header-11

Circa 2008:  High performance military jets with high service ceilings, allow aerosol deployment at higher altitudes and speeds than most commercial and large military tankers.

This video shows “sputtering” aerosol emissions from both aircraft flying in close formation. The smaller jet is most likely an experimental “stealth” class aircraft, designed to deploy aerosols with minimal visual and/or electronic detection. The small airframe also suggests the craft could be a pilotless drone.

Maneuvering in virtually identical airspace it’s clearly evident that both craft are emitting aerosols.

ETC Group’s Opposition to Geoengineering Ignores 2 Decades of Aerosol Dumps 2

Engineering Our Climate Header

Comment:  The ETC. group will be far more effective when they join the millions of like-minded citizens who have been protesting the current and ongoing geoengineering of global atmosphere with jet aircraft aerosols.

In light of the conclusive evidence of aerosol geoengineering operations in plain sight in our skies every day, it causes us to wonder what obstacles are at work to cause the resourceful ETC group to deny the past two decades of solar radiation blocking using chemically induced, persistent contrails and aerosol dumps.

Geongingeering with atmospheric aerosol deployments has been obviously taking place for 2 decades or more. It’s time for the ETC group to explain why they are turning down an opportunity to inform the public that what they’re protesting is already happening.

Publicly available documentation from the Department of Homeland Security confirms they are using aerosols to manipulate hurricanes under operation “HAMP” –  Hurricane Aerosol Microphysics Program.  Although HAMP is only one layer of the varied global geoengineering programs covertly deployed today,  the DHS boldly confirms that aerosols are a proven technique for weather and climate modification.  Why does the ETC group not take the opportunity to point out an aerosol operation that is already in operation with documentation freely available in the public record?

Meanwhile millions are complaining about atmospheric aerosol dumps visible in plain sight and confirmed by lab analysis and other forensic certainties documented by investigators at

Applied contrail science has long determined that persistent contrails should not form in skies traveled by jet aircraft when the relative humidity is low, yet observers see parallel lines and circles in the sky that  are created in condition where relative humidity is under 40% and less.

Despite the disinformation of “conspiracy theory”, the  Department of Defense wrote the first book on “Chemtrails” in 1990 as title to a chemistry manual for future pilots at the Air Force Academy. The term “chemtrails” was eventually adopted by civilian observers to describe

unnatural jet aircraft contrails.  The number of complaints about aerosols in our skies is too large to ignore, however it remains an unspoken topic within groups like ETC. otherwise empowered with resources to to inform the public.


Opposition to Geoengineering – There’s No Place Like H.O.M.E.

Opinion Article – ETC Group

In April 2010, the World Peoples’ Conference on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth, held in Cochabamba, Bolivia, brought together more than 25,000 campesinos, teachers, students, engineers, activists, diplomats, elders and ordinary
folk to discuss how best to minimize the impacts of global warming and to respond to the failure of negotiations at the UN Framework Climate on Climate Change to bring about reductions in global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Seventeen working groups contributed to a Peoples Agreement, which explicitly rejected geoengineering as a “false solution” to climate change.[1] From Cochabamba, the “Hands Off Mother Earth” (HOME) campaign to oppose geoengineering experiments was launched.[2]

Since Cochabamba, a small but influential group of researchers has increased calls for governments to support geoengineering experiments as part of developing a “Plan B” or “insurance policy” in the event of a “climate emergency”[3] – despite the adoption of a decision to restrict geoengineering activities by the UN’s Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) in October 2010. *** Complete article

Chemtrail Patents: Bernard Eastlund Patent 4,686,605 7


Chemtrail Patents: United States Patent 4,686,605    Source

Atmospheric Geoengineering is occuring in our skies daily, and on a worldwide basis.For those who doubt the feasibility of these special operations, just take a look at the following Patents.
Chemtrail Patents:
Method and apparatus for altering a region in the earth’s atmosphere, ionosphere, and/or magnetosphere.
United States Patent 4,686,605 / Eastlund / August 11, 1987
A method and apparatus for altering at least one selected region which normally exists above the earth’s surface. The region is excited by electron cyclotron resonance heating to thereby increase its charged particle density. In one embodiment, circularly polarized electromagnetic radiation is transmitted upward in a direction substantially parallel to and along a field line which extends through the region of plasma to be altered. The radiation is transmitted at a frequency which excites electron cyclotron resonance to heat and accelerate the charged particles. This increase in energy can cause ionization of neutral particles which are then absorbed as part of the region thereby increasing the charged particle density of the region.  ***continue
Method of modifying weather
United States Patent 6,315,213 / Cordani / November 13, 2001.
A method for artificially modifying the weather by seeding rain clouds of a storm with suitable cross-linked aqueous polymer. The polymer is dispersed into the cloud and the wind of the storm agitates the mixture causing the polymer to absorb the rain. This reaction forms a gelatinous substance which precipitates to the surface below. Thus, diminishing the clouds ability to rain.  ***continue
Process for absorbing ultraviolet radiation using dispersed melanin

United States Patent / 5,286,979 / Berliner / February 15, 1994

This invention is a process for absorbing ultraviolet radiation in the atmosphere by dispersing melanin, its analogs, or derivatives into the atmosphere. By appropriate choice of melanin composition, size of melanin dispersoids, and their concentration, the melanin will absorb some quantity of ultraviolet radiation and thereby lessen its overall effect on the critters who would normally absorb such radiation.  ***continue

Liquid atomizing apparatus for aerial spraying
United States Patent / 4,948,050 / Picot / August 14, 1990

A rotary liquid spray atomizer for aerial spraying is driven by a variable speed motor, driven in turn by power from a variable speed AC generator. The generator is driven from a power take-off from the engine of the spraying aircraft, a drive assembly includes a device for controlling the speed of the generator relative to the speed of the engine. The particularly convenient drive assembly between the generator and the power take-off is a hydraulic motor, which drives the generator, driven by a hydraulic pump driven from the power take-off. The speed of the hydraulic motor can be controllably varied. Conveniently the AC motor is a synchronous motor.  ***continue

Laminar microjet atomizer and method of aerial spraying of liquids
United States Patent / 4,412,654 Yates / November 1, 1983

A laminar microjet atomizer and method of aerial spraying involve the use of a streamlined body having a slot in the trailing edge thereof to afford a quiescent zone within the wing and into which liquid for spraying is introduced. The liquid flows from a source through a small diameter orifice having a discharge end disposed in the quiet zone well upstream of the trailing edge. The liquid released into the quiet zone in the slot forms drops characteristic of laminar flow. Those drops then flow from the slot at the trailing edge of the streamlined body and discharge into the slipstream for free distribution.  ***continue

Rocket having barium release system to create Ion clouds in the upper atmosphere.
United States Patent: – US3813875 / Issued/Filed Dates: June 4, 1974 / April 28, 1972

A chemical system for releasing a good yield of free barium (Ba°) atoms and barium ions (BA+) to create ion clouds in the upper atmosphere and interplanetary space for the study of the geophysical properties of the medium. Inventor(s): Paine; Thomas O. Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration with respect to an invention of , Hampton, VA 23364  ***continue

NASA: BARIUM – Chemical Formulas/Suppliers – source: gisgaia
This is the “Description of Preferred Embodiments” link in the NASA Barium Patent listed above. Astounding that this information was generated in l969 and now, 30 years later, there is evidence of Barium saturation in our atmosphere.

The Barium/Fuel mixtures are listed below along with the suppliers.

Description of Preferred Embodiments:
Referring now to the drawings and more particularly to FIG. 1, there is shown a segment of a suitable carrier vehicle 10, such for example a rocket motor. Vehicle 10 is employed to carry fuel tank 11, insulated oxidizer tank 13 and combustion chamber 15, along with the necessary instrumentation, from earth into the upper atmosphere or into interplanetary space. Fuel tank 11 is in fluid connection with combustion chamber 15 and oxidizer tank 13 is in fluid connection with combustion chamber 15 by way of respective conduits 17 and 19. A pair of valves 21 and 23 are disposed within the respective conduits 17 and 19. Valves 21 and 23 are adapted to be selectively and simultaneously opened by a suitable battery-powered timing mechanism, radio signal, or the like, to release the pressurized fuel and oxidizer from tanks 11 and 13. The fuel and oxidizer then flow through conduits 17 and 19 and impinge upon each other through a centrally positioned manifold and suitable jets (not shown) in combustion chamber 15 where spontaneous ignition occurs. The reaction products are then expelled through the open ends of combustion chamber 15 as plasma which includes the desired barium neutral atoms and barium ions as individual species.

The fuel utilized in fuel tank 11 is either hydrazine (N2 H4) or liquid ammonia (NH3) while the oxidizer employed is selected from the group consisting of liquid fluorine (F2), chlorine trifluoride (ClF3) and oxygen difluoride (OF2). When using hydrazine as the fuel, barium may be dissolved therein as barium chloride, BaCl2, or barium nitrate, Ba(NO3)2, or a combination of the two. When using liquid ammonia as the fuel, barium metal may be dissolved therein. The combination found to produce the highest intensity of Ba° and Ba+ resonance radiation in ground based tests involved a fuel of 16 percent Ba(NO3)2, 17 percent BaCl2 and 67 percent N2 H4 ; and as the oxidizer, the cryogenic liquid fluorine F2 and in which an oxidizer to fuel weight ratio was 1.32.

Other combinations of ingredients tested are set forth in Table I below:

System Optimum O/F Percent
16.7% BaCl2 -
83.3% N2 H4 /ClF3
2.36 68.0
26% BaCl2 -
74% N2 H4 /ClF3
2.08 70.0
50% Ba(NO3)2 -
50% NH3 /ClF3
1.52 -
42.9% Ba(NO3)2 -
57.1% N2 H4 /ClF3
1.19 50.0
16.7% BaCl2 -
83.3% N2 H4 /F2
1.95 68.8
26% BaCl2 -
74% N2 H4 /F2
1.71 70.6
21% BaCl2 -
9% Ba(NO3)2 -
70% N2 H4 /F2
1.57 68.5
17% BaCl2 -
16% Ba(NO3)2 -
67% N2 H4 /F2
1.31 68.1
13% BaCl2 -
21.5% Ba(NO3)2 -
65.5% N2 H4 /F2
1.34 63.7
9% BaCl2 -
30% Ba(NO3)2 -
61% N2 H4 /F2
1.04 63.7
42.9% Ba(NO3)2 -
57.1% N2 H4 /F2
0.976 43.0
42.9% Ba(NO3)2 -
57.1% N2 H4 /OF2
0.694 46.9
26% BaCL2 -
74% N2 H4 /OF2
1.22 52.8
The conditions under which each of the combinations listed in Table I were tested were ambient and the percentage ionization was calculated by equations set forth in NASA Contract Report CR-1415 published in August 1969.

The chemical supplier and manufacturers stated purity for the various chemicals employed are set forth in Table II below:
Supplier Purity
N2 H4
Olin Mathieson Chemical
Technical Grade
Company, Lake Charles,
97-98% N2 H4
Louisiana (2-3% H2 O)

Air Products and Chemicals
Technical Grade
Allentown, Pa.

J. T. Baker & Co. Reagent Grade
Phillipsburg, N.J.

J. T. Baker & Co. Reagent Grade
Phillipsburg, N.J.

F2 Air Products & Chemicals
Allentown, Pa.
Allied Chemical Co.
Baton Rouge, La.
Allied Chemical Co.
Baton Rouge, La.


A solubility study of various mixtures containing Ba(NO3)2, BaCl2 and N2 H4 was made at room temperature and is shown in the triangular plot of FIG. 2. Seven solutions that were used in the tests enumerated in Table I are indicated by reference letters in FIG. 2 as follows:
a. 16.7% BaCl2 – 83.3% N2 H4
b. 26% BaCl2 – 74% N2 H4
c. 21% BaCl2 – 9% Ba(NO3)2 – 70% N2 H4
d. 17% BaCl2 – 16% Ba(NO3)2 – 67% N2 H4
e. 13% BaCl2 -21.5% Ba(NO3)2 -65.5% N2 H4
f. 9% BaCl2 – 30% Ba(NO3)2 – 61% N2 H4
g. 42.9% Ba(NO3)2 – 57.1% N2 H4

A mixture below the Saturation Line, that is toward the Ba(NO3)2 or BaCl2 corners contained a solid and a solution phase whereas the salts were in complete solution above the saturation line.

All fuel mixtures or systems described were easily handled except the 50 percent Ba(NO3)2 -50 percent NH3 system. This system caused clogging of the feed valves due to precipitation of the Ba(NO3)2. In addition the light values obtained using this system was relatively low.

In testing of each of the fuel mixtures set forth in Table I the Ba° light was greater than the Ba+ light for a given oxidizer/fuel ratio in each of the mixtures. The maximum light occurred in all systems at a point located between the stoichiometric O/F and 3 percent less than the stoichiometric O/F. The stoichiometric O/F is defined as being equivalent to the oxidizer to fuel weight ratio in a balanced equation assuming the salt is converted to free Ba, F to HF, Cl to HCl and O to H2 O. For example, one system tested had an O/F ratio of 142 grams oxidizer per 100 grams fuel or 1.42/1.00. If the barium is assumed to be converted to BaF2 then the stoichiometric O/F is 1.47. Since the greatest light output in all cases occurred with O/F less than stoichiometric it is apparent that little of the Ba was combined as BaF2 or BaCl2.  This was confirmed by spectrographic analysis.

In Table II the various systems are listed in decreasing light output or relative light intensity as measured by phototubes in millivolts, thereby indicating the relative barium yield.

(percent weight for fuel)
INTENSITY, millivolts
Ba° 5535 A
Ba+ 4554 A
17% BaCl2 -16% Ba(NO3)2 -67% N2 H4 /F2
13% BaCl2 -21.5% Ba(NO3)2 -65.5% N2 H4 /F2
21% BaCl2 -9% Ba(NO3)2 -70% N2 H4 /F2
9% BaCl2 -30% Ba(NO3)2 -61% N2 H4 /F2
26% BaCl2 -74% N2 H4 /F2
26% BaCl2 -74% N2 H4 /OF2
16.7% BaCl2 -83.3% N2 H4 /F2
9100 3350
42.9% Ba(NO3)2 -57.1% N2 H4 /F2
9000 1800
42.9% Ba(NO3)2 -57.1% N2 H4 /OF2
7300 1330
42.9% Ba(NO3)2 -57.1% N2 H4 /ClF3
663 94
50% Ba(NO3)2 -50% NH3 /ClF3
221 44
From the above information, it is readily seen that the 17 percent BaCl2 -16 percent Ba(NO3)2 -67 percent N2 H4 /F2 system gave the greatest amount of light intensity of the 4554 A Ba+ and 5535 A Ba° spectral lines. Ambient tests showed that the optimum oxidizer to fuel ratio of this system was 1.32 to 1.00. This system containing 8.52 weight percent barium was estimated to be 68.1 percent ionized. Also since this system had the largest relative light intensity it would be expected to give the greatest amount of Ba° and Ba+ and would appear to be the optimum system for a barium payload. In all systems tested it was found that the relative light reached a maximum at the O/F corresponding to the stoichiometric equation yielding barium as one of the reaction products and that the relative light output was sensitive to the O/F. Moving to either side of the optimum O/F caused a sharp decrease in relative light.
In vacuum tests the ignition of each system tested was smooth and like the ambient tests, took place in the combustion chamber. The rapid expansion in vacuum caused a decreased atom and ion density in the luminous flame which caused the light intensity to be about 1/37 to 1/50 the intensity measured in ambient tests. The percentage ionization was approximately the same for vacuum and ambient tests.
The operation of the invention is now believed apparent. Initially, fuel tank 11 is charged with the fuel containing the desired quantity of dissolved barium salt and pressurized with helium. The fuel tank pressure may be in the range of 6.89 to 20.06 ¥ 105 Newton/meter2. Oxidizer tank 13 is also charged with the appropriate oxidizer and pressurized. Cryogenic oxidizers such as OF2 and F2 are condensed from gases in the closed oxidizer tank which must be maintained enclosed in a liquid nitrogen bath. The oxidizer feed valve 23 and conduit 19 must also be maintained at liquid nitrogen temperature with a liquid nitrogen jacket when employing a cryogenic oxidizer.
The noncryogenic oxidizer, ClF3, may be pressurized into the closed oxidizer tank 13 from a supply bottle with super dry nitrogen.
Combustion chamber 15 is formed of stainless steel, aluminum, or the like F2 compatible metals and is internally partitioned by the manifold, not shown. The conduits 17 and 19 terminate in a manifold having injector orifices (not shown) mounted 90° to each other within each end of chamber 15 and sized for pressure drops of 5.24 to 10.2 ¥ 105 Newton/meter2 across the orifice. Fuel and oxidizer flows are in the range of 2.05 to 6.82 Kg/sec each. The entire system is carried into the upper atmosphere or interplanetary space by rocket vehicle 10 where, in response to a suitable signal, timing mechanism or the like, valves 21 and 23 may be selectively opened and closed and the pressurized liquid fuel and oxidizer will flow through conduits 17 and 19 into combination unit 15. When the hypergolic liquids impinge upon each other, they spontaneously ignite to expel reaction product gases or plasma including the highly luminous barium neutral atoms and barium ions as individual species.
All of the barium reaching the combustion chamber is vaporized and released through the opposite ends thereof so that a high yield efficiency is obtained. The resulting high flame temperature, approximately 4,000°K., and some as yet not determined chemical activation, produces a relatively large amount of barium ions in the flame which is a highly desirable condition. It has been estimated from spectroscopic measurements that the degree of ionization may be as high as 75 percent in the released plasma in comparison to being on the order of 1 percent for the previously used Ba-CuO solid system which depends almost entirely on solar photoionization, a time-dependent phenomena which further reduces the usable barium yield of this known system.
Thus, it is readily apparent that the present invention provides an inherently more efficient process of producing barium clouds wherein the degree of ionization in the released plasma is much greater. The selectively opening and closing of valves 21 and 23 gives the possibility of a payload with multiple releases permitted due to the start and stop capabilities of the liquid system. Also, the liquid system of the present invention gives the possibility of controlling rates so that a trail type release can be obtained as well as a point-source type. In addition, the liquid system of the present invention effects the formation of barium atoms and ions at the time of combustion and expansion at high temperatures and results in little opportunity for the barium to condense during release.
There are obviously many variations and modifications to the present invention that will be readily apparent to those skilled in the art without departing from the spirit or scope of the disclosure or from the scope of the claims.
Informant: George Paxinos

Post by Robert M Forgette · Top Commenter · Owner-Operator at CommServices and X10Protection
  • PATENT #: 4873928 - October 17, 1989 – Nuclear-sized explosions without radiation
  • PATENT #: 3994437 – November 30, 1976 – Broadcast dissemination of trace quantities of biologically active chemicals
  • PATENT  #: 6030506 – February 29, 2000 – Preparation of independently generated highly reactive chemical species.
The Term, “REACTIVE CHEMICAL SPECIES” worded within Patent# 6030506 caused me to look closer. I found this link: … pdf .... …. Where I located the Science behind Disbursement of ChemTrails. It’s amazing the research, detail and calculations these guys have done. It’s scarey to wonder exactly WHAT ELSE they place in it chemically. From WHAT they mix, to HOW they mix, to Turbulence factors while in the disbursement process, then on to how well mixed the Plume is. Cloud seeding my ass. Apologies, but I like to dig deep when researching things.
German Scientist Exposes Chemtrails As Military Operations:

UK Research Scientist Presents Lecture on Geoengineering and Chemtrails 2

Increases in extreme weather, food prices and illness: the unspoken connection”

David Lim Reading University lecture on chemtrails

David Lim – Reading U. Article    PDF

Published on 6 Apr 2013

This presentation by David Lim is intended to introduce the topic of  geoengineering, chemtrails and weather modification to audiences with limited knowledge of the subject.  It therefore provides an overview of this lesser known area of science.

The talk is entitled:  “Increases in extreme weather, food prices and illness: the unspoken connection”  and held in Trent, Sherborne, Dorset (UK) on 27th March 2013 to an audience of 80 persons.

The “questions and answers” session lasted 90 minutes but has been excluded from the clip for manageability.

It was apparent that very few in attendance were aware of geoengineering, chemtrails and political issues underpinning this vast topic.  A multitude of peripheral issues were also discussed  leaving many with much to consider.

Dr Lim’s introduction:

“I am a doctoral researcher at University of Reading (UK) looking at domestic electrical loads, when I stumbled across the science of ‘environmental manipulation’, encompassing Geoengineering, Weather Modification and Military Operations – all of which pose a significant risk to natural systems. Period. Having investigated the climate change debate and become acquainted with ‘the bigger picture’ – delineated by topics such as politics, geopolitics, history, meteorology, sociology, economics, physics, metaphysics, quantum mechanics, medicine, law, military and many others – I concluded that something was wrong. In fact many ‘things’ are wrong with the version of reality that is presented to us by the mainstream media and government. It has taken over 1,500 research hours to comprehensively put together the pieces of the geoengineering puzzle, which pulls in all of the other subjects mentioned afore, it just does. The vast majority of people simply don’t have the energy or time to investigate such overarching topics as geoengineering, thus many are left in the dark. Herein, I simply aim to shed some light on this murky area, for those at stage one of ‘the journey’…   Thank you”,  David Lim


Satellite and Chemtrail Jet Tracking Tools 5

MUST SEE – Stunning Telescopic Video

Complete Article

  • NOAA Visualization Lab The GOES-East sat images of the Northern Hemisphere every 30 minutes and of the entire Western Hemisphere every 3 hours.
  • NOAA GOES Composite satellite imaging products.
  • GIBS The Global Imagery Browse Services are a set of standard services to deliver global, full-resolution satellite imagery for a broad range of users.
  • EOSDIS Earth Orbiting Sat. Data and Info System.
  • Terra Satellite
  • Aqua Satellite


More Satellites


Chemtrails and Geoengineering: The Hard Evidence 1


Richard Feynman

Occam’s Razor is a fundamental method of logic and problem-solving. It states that among competing hypotheses, the hypothesis with the fewest assumptions should be selected.

The principal of Occam’s Razor obligates us to regard the consensus of the observers as plausible. If we can offer no scientific basis to deny the chemtrails “hypothesis”, we must first rule-out the observer’s hypothesis before we can “guess” at a different one. Personal opinions based on social norms does not serve to debunk a hypothesis based on physics. For example, it’s irrelevant to say: “…oh, the government would never do a thing like that”.

Nobel Laureate, Richard Feynman explained the scientific method in clear English in one minute.

It doesn’t take a genius to understand the essentials of the scientific method, yet many are willing to respond to a valid hypothesis with emotional denial based on conspiracy panic – a state of denial based on fear of consequences if the hypothesis were proved to be true. (Conspiracy Panic Phenomenon – James Tracy)

USAF_Air-Force-Academy-Chemtrails ManualIn 1999, the US Air Force Academy Chemistry Department used a course manual titled “Chemtrails”. (Download “Chemtrails Manual” PDF)

This 1991 chemistry manual is similar to: “Chemtrails” – ISBN: 0840378246 by USAF Staff and published by: Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company, May 1992. paperback, 224 pages. The cover depicts two visible trail emissions from an ignited Bunsen Burner – possibly, suggesting a jet engine. The word “chemtrails” appears between the upper and lower “trails”. Also, the course curriculum as described in the video appears compatible with weather modification using plasma ions and related chemistry.

Note: The Bunsen Burner is a common piece of laboratory equipment that produces a single open gas flame used for heating, sterilization, and combustion.

Congressman Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio introduced a Bill – HR 2977 aka the Space Preservation Act of 2001. The word “Chemtrails” appears in the House Resolution and defined as an “Exotic Weapon”. ***source 

CASE ORANGE REPORT provides conclusive evidence for covert Aerosol Geoengineering.

Aerospace Engineer, Dr. Coen Vermeeren presents an informal peer-review of the 360 page research document “Case Orange” commissioned by the Belfort Group. (Dr. Vermeeren’s Bio)

Dr. Vermeeren agreed with the conclusions of the report with virtual unanimous consensus within the Belfort Group membership …More

DOCUMENTARIES: Why In The World Are They Spraying?: Released in early September, 2012, this is the second documentary exposing a classified global geoengineering program where military and now, civilian jet aircraft release nano-sized heavy metals and other toxins into the upper atmosphere.

The populace term for this global spraying operation is “chemtrails” – a term used in the 2001 language of House Resolution 2977 sponsored by Rep., Dennis Kucinich.

In 2001 Proposed legislation (HR 2977) created a buzz in the Air Traffic Control community. Introduced by Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich, this bill called for the peaceful uses of space, and a ban on ‘exotic weapons’ .
Section 7 of the ‘Space Preservation Act of 2001′ sought specifically to PROHIBIT “CHEMTRAILS”. (Source)

Click to See

One agenda of this geoengineering operation is now revealed to be “Climate Modification for Profit” through speculation on energy, crop and commodity futures on the Chicago Climate Exchange. “Derivatives” are alive and well in this commodity futures scheme taken straight out of the ENRON play-book.

The first documentary released in 2010 (What in the World Are They Spraying) reveals how scientists are planning to spray aluminum particles high in the atmosphere to mitigate global warming. Geoengineer, David Keith presented this concept at the 2010 AAAS meeting. See both videos here

But millions of citizens and scientists worldwide have been witnessing this very same operation already in full deployment since the mid-90’s. Much of the evidence is the thousands of Youtube videos uploaded by observers in more than two dozen countries over the past 10 years. (video archive)

Recent evidence reveals that 2 decades of climate manipulation through covert aerosol geoengineering has caused or contributed to the same global warming and drought that the UN/IPCC has falsely warned is caused by CO2.

The loop-hole that allows the IPCC to ignore jet aircraft aerosols (real and man-made) is hidden in the IPCC’s own exemption of impacts to global warming/climate change by private, military and commercial aircraft.

The exemption not only hides the massive impact of CO2 injected into the upper atmosphere by thousands of jet engines – it also hides the deployment of millions of tons of aerosols that are further heating the earth’s climate. (source)

CARNICOM INSTITUTE: This website the work of brilliant researcher, Cliff Carnicom located in Santa Fe New Mexico. Cliff’s many published papers are available in an online research library that continue to provide a science-based conclusion for a covert aerosol geoengineering. This library is essential for anyone doing related research.

GEOENGINEERINGWATCH.ORG: This website is maintained by WITWATS Documentary Producer, Michael Murphy, Dane Wigington and principals of the Mount Shasta Jet Aerosol Geoengineering complaint.

AGRICULTURAL DEFENSE COALITION: This website is the brilliant work of former USDS official, Rosalind Peterson where archives of government documents are cataloged for anyone doing research on aerosol geoengineering and the consequences to agriculture. health, forests, water sheds and earth resources.

HANDS OFF MOTHER EARTH: Hands Off Mother Earth (H.O.M.E) is a global campaign to defend our one precious home, planet earth, against the threat of geoengineering experiments. Join with us to send a clear message to the geoengineers and to governments worldwide that our home is not a laborator

CITIZEN LEGAL ACTION: Long Island, NY – Maui, Hawaii – Mt. Shasta, CA and other local governments are fighting back with legislation to require the Pentagon and/or Congress to provide full disclosure of their aerosol geoengineering operations.

Trimethylaluminum Successfully Tested as Aviation Fuel Additive in 1958 Reply

Trimethyalminium (TMA) was added to aviation fuel in 1958 to test it’s effectiveness at increasing jet engine afterburner efficiency at high altitude. TMA was found to be acceptably stable when mixed with aviation fuel to 14% by volume. TMA is easily capable of producing long white trails of aluminium oxide aerosols – aka Chemtrails.  PDF Source:

The video provides an important analysis of Geoengineer, David Kieth’s comments concerning the preferred use of “alumina” as the compound most effectively sprayed by jet aircraft in order to mitigate global warming. The term “alumina” refers to aluminum oxide – the most dangerous form of the heavy metal to human and plant life.

It’s important to make the distinction that drinking soda from a lined aluminum can is nowhere near the infinitely higher health risk of breathing, inhaling or otherwise ingesting aluminum oxide suspended in the atmosphere as it falls from a sky full of aluminized jet aircraft aerosols.

We attempt to explain the physics of how jet fuel can be formulated to actually contain aluminum in the form of trimethylaluminum in order to spray aluminum oxide aerosols that originate directly from additives already in the jet fuel.

This could explain how aerosol spraying is achieved without the wide use of special “black ops” airports where tons of aluminum compounds are covertly loaded aboard “chemtrail” aircraft . Instead, the military and their contractors simply fill the aircraft tanks from a fuel source available at the many military, civilian and even private airports located around the world. Although aviation fuel laced with TMA is not conventional JP-4 fuel, the installation of numerous TMA fuel sources can be easily standardized at airport locations worldwide. Here’s why:

In 2010, Geoengineer, David Keith contracted Aurora Flight Sciences (AFS) to perform a cost analysis for Geoengineering based on the TMA spray model. AFS determined that the Boeing 747 would be the most efficient aircraft since about half of the world’s cargo is currently transported by 747.

The melting point of Aluminum is 660 deg C. while the combustion chamber in a 747 engine is over 1,800 deg C. This combination would cause any aluminum in the fuel supply to vaporize on combustion and for a while longer as it exits the engine exhaust as thrust. The vaporized aluminum remains transparent until it mixes with oxygen to allow the aluminum vapor to transform into its final stage as a metallic powder aerosol of aluminum oxide. Observers are understandably confused when the temporary “invisibility” of the aluminum vapor somewhat mimics the appearance of a normal contrail. When the contrail of aluminum oxide continues for miles the agents of disinformation will incorrectly claim that it’s a “persistent contrail” of water vapor. The problem with this devious explanation is that Contrail science requires that very high relative humidity must prevail where the aircraft is flying. But the relative humidity of the upper atmosphere above 32,000 feet rarely exceeds 60% which is far too low for persistent contrail formation.

In more controlled studies, the actual altitude of the aircraft and the relative humidity are measured with weather-sonde balloon instruments at 10 to 40% RH to reveal persistent contrail formations that are impossible to achieve as water vapor but are consistent with geoengineering aerosols.

With a record one (1) million top secret clearances attached to military programs in 2011 the opportunity for the public to fall victim to “scientific disinformation” in mainstream media is noe epidemic. Since security clearances act like a gag order to honest and qualified experts, the disinformants have more free reign than ever to cajole the public by claiming that a whole sky full of tic-tac-toe aerosols is nothing more than a bunch of “persistent contrails”.

Source Source Source

In order to avoid spraying chemtrails on landing, takeoff and low altitude, a second, but manageably small fuel tank is required to be installed in the cargo area. The calculated size for the 2nd tank barely compromises the ability of a 747 aircraft in its mission transport cargo.


Trimethylaluminium is the chemical compound with the formula Al2(CH3)6, abbreviated as Al2Me6, (AlMe3)2 or the abbreviation TMA. This pyrophoric, colorless liquid is an industrially importantorganoaluminium compound. It evolves white smoke (aluminium oxides) when the vapor is released into the air.

MATERIAL DATA SAFETY SHEET for Trimethylaluminum Source Source

- TMA is a colorless liquid which is pyrophoric (capable of igniting spontaneously in air )

- TMA is a combination of hydrocabons that closely resembles gasoline.

- TMA is used in weather sounding rockets where the white smoke provides a “tracer” for scientists to determine wind directions it various altitudes above ground level.

- TMA Decomposes into Carbon Dioxide, Carbon Monoxide and Aluminum Oxide dust (nanoparticles)


Clues to TMA involvement in other observed atmospheric phenomena associated with geoengineering aerosols.

If TMA has been determined to be a commonly used geoengineering compound, its deployment into the atmosphere may not be necessarily confined to aerosols generated by jet engines. Indeed, an alternative deployment of artificial clouds has been observed with increased frequency in recent years. These “new” artificial clouds appear amorphous, without trails and look more like “cotton candy” . Even while the pattern of deployment documented by satellite imagery suggests aircraft are involved, the aerosols appear to be “dumped” into the atmosphere rather than sprayed from jet engines as white lines.

These covert (undisclosed) “dumps” suggest that certain batches of aluminum have been modified at the request of agencies seeking to carry out unrelated biological, chemical, communication and even weaponization experiments in the atmosphere – adding to the military’s need to continue a policy of “non-disclosure” of the basic geoengineering program that has become so obvious in the skies and now, rainwater tests.

Chemtrails With “Thumbprintsthat appear to be under the infulence of an electromagnetic field.
TMA as an Electric Semiconductor

TMA is also used in semiconductor fabrication to grow thin film, high-k dielectrics such as Al2O3 via the processes of Chemical Vapor Deposition or Atomic Layer Deposition.

Semiconductor grade TMA (Source)

TMA is the preferred metalorganic source for metalorganic vapour phase epitaxy (MOVPE) of aluminium-containing compound semiconductors, such as AlAs, AlN, AlP, AlSb, AlGaAs, AlInGaAs, AlInGaP, AlGaN, AlInGaN, AlInGaNP etc. Criteria for TMA quality focus on (a) elemental impurites, (b) oxygenated and organic impurities.

Semiconductors and polarization (Source)

What is a compound semiconductor? (Source)

A compound semiconductor is a semiconductor compound composed of elements from two or more different groups of the periodic table [1]. These semiconductors typically form in groups 13-16 (old groups III-VI), for example of elements from group 13 (old group III, Boron, Aluminium, Gallium, Indium) and from group 15 (old group V, Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Arsenic, Antimony, Bismuth). The range of possible formulae is quite broad because these elements can form binary (two elements, e.g. Gallium(III) arsenide (GaAs)), ternary (three elements, e.g. Indium gallium arsenide (InGaAs)) and quaternary (four elements, e.g. Aluminium gallium indium phosphide(AlInGaP)) alloys


Aersols “modulated” by semiconductor grade TMA reacting to remote EMF source – HAARP?


Chemtrails that Form “Cobwebs” or long-chain Network Polymer Strings: (Source)

A polymer is a large molecule (macromolecule) composed of repeating structural units. These subunits are typically connected by covalent chemical bonds. Although the term polymer is sometimes taken to refer to plastics, it actually encompasses a large class comprising both natural and synthetic materials with a wide variety of properties..

Journal of Phys Chem – 2011 May 19

Conformal organic-inorganic hybrid network polymer thin films by molecular layer deposition using trimethylaluminum and glycidol. — Abstract
Growing interest in nanoscale organic-inorganic hybrid network polymer materials is driving exploration of new bulk and thin film synthesis reaction mechanisms. Molecular layer deposition (MLD) is a vapor-phase deposition process, based on atomic layer deposition (ALD) which proceeds by exposing a surface to an alternating sequence of two or more reactant species, where each surface half-reaction goes to completion before the next reactant exposure. This work describes film growth using trimethyl aluminum and heterobifunctional glycidol at moderate temperatures (90-150 °C), producing a relatively stable organic-inorganic network polymer of the form (-Al-O-(C(4)H(8))-O-)(n). Film growth rate and in situ reaction analysis indicate that film growth does not initially follow a steady-state rate, but increases rapidly during early film growth. The mechanism is consistent with subsurface species transport and trapping, previously documented during MLD and ALD on polymers. A water exposure step after the TMA produces a more linear growth rate, likely by blocking TMA subsurface diffusion. Uniform and conformal films are formed on complex nonplanar substrates. Upon postdeposition annealing, films transform into microporous metal oxides with ∼5 Å pore size and surface area as high as ∼327 m(2)/g, and the resulting structures duplicate the shape of the original substrate. These hybrid films and porous materials could find uses in several research fields including gas separations and diffusion barriers, biomedical scaffolds, high surface area coatings, and others.

© 2011 American Chemical Society SOURCE

Contrail Science: Deliberate Ambiguity Betrays Scientific Method 1

Stunning telescopic video of aerosol emissions from jet aircraft.

Stunning telescopic video of aerosol emissions from jet aircraft – CLICK HERE

See original video here

CONTRAIL SCIENCE: Debunking a Deliberate Ambiguity Campaign by Federal Agencies and Internet Trolls who attempt to Hide Public Awareness of two decades of Covert Aerosol Geoengineering that is responsible for warming the climate and manipulating the weather. (source)

Much ambiguity has been circulated regarding the effect of humidity upon the persistence of contrails, or vapor trails. Numerous sources, without exception, state that such vapor trails (composed of water vapor by historical and conventional definition) may persist for “extended periods” under conditions of “higher” relative humidity.

Unfortunately, it is apparent that quantitative information attached to these repeated generalizations is lacking. Even the recently issued “fact sheet” under distribution by a combination of federal agencies, including the EPA, NOAA, the FAA and NASA falls victim to this same deficiency. — Cliff Carnicom

In the video below we take a look at NASA’s CONTRAIL SCIENCE website to learn how to differentiate between three types of jet aircraft contrails.

1) Short-lived, non-persistent contrail (SLNPC),

2) Persistent contrail, non-spreading (PCNS) ,

3) Persistent contrail, spreading (PCS)

We want to know under what conditions – and how often we can expect to see different manifestations of persistent contrails – whether it’s the non-spreading or spreading type.

The data available from various weather sonde systems sharply contradicts NASA’s claim that persistent contrails are a common atmospheric response to jet aircraft emissions.

The U. Wyoming is one source that aggregates atmospheric conditions collected at many sites around the US, Europe and beyond. The data above 8,500 meters or 28,000 feet reveals that conditions for formation of “persistent contrails” due to high relative humidity can be defined as a rare occurrence in typical flight paths by commercial and private jet aircraft.

NASA defines PCNS as a separate species of artificial cloud from the PCS type. NASA also avoids concluding that a PCS is necessarily evolved from a PCNS. It is, therefore possible that a PSC can either be evolved from a PCNS or appear spontaneously as a “spreading” PCS emission without ever being defined as a PCNS.  ***More

NASA Published a study in 1994: “NASA scientists have found that cirrus clouds, formed by contrails from aircraft engine exhaust, are capable of increasing average surface temperatures enough to account for a warming trend in the United States that occurred between 1975 and 1994.”  *** More

EXAMPLE: View the Photos of persistent contrails from July 2, 1999 in Ardmore, OK. Two atmospheric weathersonde data reports were recorded at the nearby Norman station on that day. Low relative humidity readings are evident in each report at altitudes above 8,500 meters ( 28,000 feet).

Conclusion: Atmospheric conditions of high relative humidity required for persistent contrail formation did not exist.

This disturbing acknowledgement of two decades of secret atmospheric heating on a planetary scale demands immediate investigation in light of conclusive evidence in the Case Orange Report for the existence of a secret jet aerosol geoengineering program that has been carried out globally under direction of the US government for over 20 years.

The work of investigator, Cliff Carnicom originally exposed the obfuscation imposed by federal agencies on the subject of contrails vs. persistent contrails vs. persistent spreading contrails.

A knowledge of atmospheric conditions required for persistent contrail formation above 8,500 meters or 28,000 feet is inexpensive and observations can be fact-checked against available weathersonde data in many instances. Although this method does not reveal the content of the presumed geoengineering compound it serves well as a repeatable method to validate the now dreaded occurrences of jet aircraft emissions of unknown composition and toxicity.

Using NASA’s own data it can be asserted with confidence that a persistent jet trail that remains visible for more than 10 minutes is not primarily water vapor and is far more likely to fit the Oxford dictionary definition of “chemtrail”.

Contrail Science B: Calculating probability of water vapor contrail formation with respect to relative humidity at flight level HERE

Contrail Science C: How to estimate the expected distance of a water vapor contrail from the jet engine during flight. HERE

USAF “Contrail Facts” Pg 13:   After the initial formation of ice, a contrail evolves in one of two ways:

“If the atmosphere is near saturation, the contrail may exist for some time. Conversely, if the atmosphere is dry, the contrail will dissipate quickly.”

USAF Contrail Facts 2000




MARK L. SCHRADER – Air Weather Service, Scott Air Force Base, Illinois
28 August 1996 and 9 December 1996

Forecasts of condensation trail (contrail) formation are an extremely important consideration in military aircraft operations, particularly in the operation of stealth aircraft. Some recently published works have claimed improvements in the time-tested forecast technique of H. Appleman, but the results are called into question by errors in the basic physics. This note provides a brief explanation of contrail formation theory and presents a simple derivation of the critical temperature of contrail formation for representative jet engine types.

1. Introduction The advent of low-observability ‘‘stealth’’ aircraft has made operational forecasting of aircraft condensation trails, or contrails, more important than ever to military aircraft operations. No amount of stealth technology can hide an aircraft if it leaves a persistent contrail in its wake.

Investigations of contrail formation are recorded as early as 1919, and research began in earnest during World War II (Schumann 1996). The definitive work on contrail forecasting is by Appleman (1953). Even today, the original Appleman technique forms the basis of the Air Force Global Weather Center’s contrail forecasting algorithm. Recently, some works (Peters 1993; Hanson and Hanson 1995) have claimed improvements in contrail forecasting techniques, but the results are called into question by errors in the basic physics.

This note provides a brief explanation of contrail formation theory and presents a simple derivation of the critical temperature.  *** Contnue   

Andrea Gains Strength As Intense Aerosol Geoegineering Continues 1

DHS - Operation HAMP Hurricane Aerosol Microphysics Program

Previous Posts on Andrea

Images below show how aerosol dumps can intensify a storm even when under significant wind shear. Notice how the eye is better defined in the most recent image.

Andrea Intellicast 6-6-2013

GOES 1431 utc 6-6

Andrea 1430: UTC: Eye wall has closed relative to the 1000 UTC image below

GOES latest

Andrea 1000 UTC: aerosol dumps target center of circulation


Tropical Storm Andrea Created With Weather Modification Aerosols 2


Tropical Storm Andrea Created With Advanced Weather Modification 

Aggressive aerosol spraying into the storm was enough to overcome strong wind-sheer that could have prevented escalation into a dangerous tropical storm.

The National Hurricane Center and Weather Service need not worry about accuracy in forecasting as long as they can create weather on demand.

This year’s hurricane season is forecast to be more active than usual. With help from the DHS operation HAMP hurricane tampering project the severe weather warfare on the American people could be executed without enough people knowing to matter.  Even before the official prognostication was published, meteorologist, Jeff Huffman and the University of Florida warned that “we’re overdue”.

The ability to turn rain clouds into tropical storms and hurricanes with aerosols and weather weapons should work well to increase severe weather forecasting.

The effectiveness of using aerosols to intensify or mitigate storms was established by the Department of Homeland Security in a presentation to the AMS.

See related posts: HERE




Geoengineer, Ken Caldeira Abondons Scientific Method to Deny Chemtrails Reply


Richard Feynman

Occam’s Razor  is a fundamental method of logic and problem-solving.  It states that among competing hypotheses, the hypothesis with the fewest assumptions should be selected.

The principal of Occam’s Razor obligates Caldeira to regard the consensus of the observers as plausible.  Since he can offer no scientific basis to deny the chemtrails “hypothesis”,  Caldeira must first rule-out the observer’s hypothesis before he can “guess” at a different one.  Instead, Caldeira pleads his personal opinion on social normalcy that essentially says:  “…oh, the government would never do a thing like that”.

Nobel LaureateRichard Feynman explained the scientific method in clear English in one minute.

It doesn’t take a genius to understand the essentials of the scientific method, yet Caldeira is willing to respond to a valid hypothesis with complete mumbo-jumbo denial.  One could “hypothesize” that Caldeira is responding to the “chemtrails” question more as a politician than a scientist.


Stop Spraying Us San Francisco header

Top Geoengineer confronted in Berkeley –  admits discussing poisoning the sky

by Patrick Roddie

Published on May 14, 2013

http://StopSprayingUs-SF.comGeoengineer Ken Calderia proposes spraying chemicals in our skies to “blunt the worst effects of global warming.” But when confronted (at 4:40) he was forced to admit there has been no global warming for at least 17 years (“it has leveled off”) and that when he worked at a nuclear weapons lab, he discussed poisoning the sky, “putting pathogens in a cloud” to “rain down on your enemy and do chemical and germ warfare.” But he assured us there was no reason for concern.

Top Geoengineer Ken Calderia proposes spraying chemicals in our skies to “blunt the worst effects of global warming.” But when confronted at a geoengineering debate in Berkeley, he was forced to admit there has been no global warming for at least 17 years (“it has leveled off”) and that when he worked at a nuclear weapons lab, he discussed poisoning the sky, “putting pathogens in a cloud” to “rain down on your enemy and do chemical and germ warfare.” But he assured us there was no reason for concern.

Don’t miss Alan Watt’s comments on weather modification, chemtrails

UK NEWS: US Weapon May Change Weather 1

LeicestershireUS weapon may change weather
Friday, May 31, 2013

Elizabeth Allison is right to be alarmed (“Can we really control nature?”, Mailbox, May 21).

Not content with altering the freezing point of moisture in clouds, the US has been experimenting with the High-frequency Active Auroral Research Program (Haarp) for some time.

It claims to be developing Haarp as a weapon of self-defence and is experimenting by bouncing electromagnetic pulses off the ionosphere.

Scientists are saying this could cause the ionosphere to heat up, rise, and, in turn, affect the jet stream, causing freak weather condition. *** continue



Hurricane Katrina Engineered With Aerosols For Maximum Destruction 1

NOAA visualization lab header

Hurricane Katrina – NOAA Visualization Lab

Close inspection of satellite images and animation between 8/23 and 8/30/2005 reveals strong evidence that weather modification and intensification of Hurricane Katrina was achieved using atmospheric aerosol dumps to maximize damage to the fragile Louisiana Gulf coast and New Orleans.


Weather Modification under the DHS,  Hurricane Aerosol Microphysics Program (HAMP)

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has been operating under operation “HAMP” to modify hurricanes.  In a presentation to the American Meteorological Society, Joe Golden confirmed that tropical cyclones could be weakened or intensified depending on how aerosols are deployed withing the circulation.  The deployment of “black carbon” was mentioned as an effective force multiplier to increase (weaponize) a storm’s intensity. Key comments from Joe Golden are captured on video  *** complete article

Why is DHS dabbling in Hurricanes?  The real question is why does DHS exist at all?.  The concept of Homeland Security is repugnant and echoes the brutal fascist years of Nazi Germany.

Related Articles:  HERE

In the video below, forecaster Robert Ricks comments on Hurricane Katrina and his surprise at the sudden intensification of the storm. Intuitively, Ricks uses the familiar cliche’s, “War Zone” and “Ground Zero” to describe a feeling that New Orleans had been under “attack”.  How right he was.


KATRINA Terra Sat. 8/23/2005


KATRINA Aqua Sat. 8/23/2005


KATRINA Terra Sat. 8/24/2005


KATRINA Aqua Sat. 8/24/2005

25-Katrina-Both USA7.2005237.terra.250m-8-25

KATRINA Terra Sat. 8/25/2005

25-Katrina-Both USA7.2005237.aqua.250m-8-25

KATRINA Aqua Sat. 8/25/2005


KATRINA Terra Sat. 8/26/2005


KATRINA Aqua Sat. 8/26/2005


KATRINA Terra Sat. 8/27/2005


KATRINA Aqua Sat. 8/27/2005


KATRINA Terra Sat. 8/28/2005

28-Katrina-Both-USA7.2005240.aqua.250m 8-28

KATRINA Aqua Sat. 8/28/2005


KATRINA Terra Sat. 8/29/2005


KATRINA Aqua Sat. 8/29/2005


KATRINA Terra Sat. 8/30/2005


KATRINA Aqua Sat. 8/30/2005