FAQ

Share on Pinterest
There are no images.

If you have any questions you would like to be added to our FAQ, please submit it using the form below.

What are chemtrails?

Chemtrails is a term widely used to describe unusual persistent jet emissions. They are highly toxic trails of sub micon particulates including ionizing salts left by planes that make man-made toxic cloud cover. Chemtrails are defined in HR-2977 (PDF) as an “exotic weapon” – NOT a method to “counteract anthropogenic (man made) climate change”.

Back To Top

What is geo-engineering?

Geo-engineering is the deliberate and large-scale intervention in the earths climate system.

Back To Top

What is Stratospheric Sulphate Aerosols Geo-engineering (SAG-SRM)?

Stratospheric Aerosol Geo-engineering (SAG) is a technique of Solar Radiation Management (SRM) designed to reflect sunlight before it reaches the planet. It involves  the injection of sulphate aerosols into the stratosphere via jet aircraft to supposedly reflect sunlight for climate change mitigation and weather modification.

Back To Top

Aren’t all the trails in the sky just normal condensation trails from commercial airliners?

Jet contrails, which occur at high altitudes (e.g., 40,000 feet) disappear quickly – much like your breath on a cold winter day.  They are simply made of water vapor.

Clouds need 70% moisture to form.  Contrails need low humidity (moisture) to form. 

As top-notch researcher Clifford Carnicom notes, “If ‘contrails’ by appearance transform into ‘clouds’, it can be concluded that the material of composition is not water vapor.”

What this means:  If what looks like a contrail then becomes a cloud, it isn’t made of water vapor.

Back To Top

Is there any hard evidence that SAG / chemtrailing is happening now?

There are documented lists of weather modification programs published by The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the NASA  Scientist, Douglas E Rowland, speaks openly about them.

Back To Top

Lots of things are made from aluminium, copper and zinc, etc. so what’s all the fuss about?

It’s the amounts found over the safe and normal limits that make the issue significant and hazardous. The rise in health related diseases connected to these elements makes further scientific investigation a paramount priority.

Back To Top

Might the heavy metals in the rainwater test results have come from ground dust, etc. rather than from the sky?

Ground dust and contaminants in the rainwater are eliminated when correct collection procedures are carried out  150 miles from coal burning facilities.

Back To Top

But surely they wouldn’t do something like chemtrailing?

Aerosol spraying is a covert operation on a Grand Scale.

Evergreen’s fleet of B-747 supertankers are fitted with their own patent of pressurized ejection ports capable of delivering tons of chemical weather modification aerosols over a distance of 200 miles.  Although this amazing aircraft was presented to the public for it’s effective wildfire containment capabilities, not one aircraft has yet been deployed to assist the numerous killer wildfires in the western USA since it’s public debut in 2009.  These super-tankers are far from sitting idle in the boneyard.  Instead, these mammoth 747′s are used to deploy geo-engineering aerosols around the planet – a capability fully acknowledged in the Evergreen Air patent.

Back To Top

If chemtrailing was really happening, wouldn’t an insider have spoken up by now?

The dire consequences of whistleblowing are enough to prevent people from speaking out. The risks are: isolation, criticism, and often the loss of a job or even a career /life preventing people from speaking out.

The fact that 100,000 people worked on the Manhattan Project,  the United States’ secret plan to develop atomic weapons for use in warfare, and yet they managed to keep it a secret from Vice President Truman until he took office shows how secret projects can exist without the public knowing.

Back To Top

What good is chemtrailing doing to the planet?

Benefits are said to include:  Cooling the planet and reversing sea ice melting and reduce rising sea levels and said to increase plant productivity. But the risks outweigh the benefits.

Back To Top

Do chemtrails help combat climate change?

They are in fact creating climate extremes and exacerbating extreme weather events dubbed “climate change”.

Back To Top

What harm is chemtrailing doing the planet?

According to the research of Dane Wigington of GeoengineeringWatch.org, chemtrails and geo-engineering are the single, greatest threat to life on Planet Earth. UN scientists estimate that 150-200 species of plant, insect, bird and mammal become extinct every 24 hours. This is nearly 1,000 times the “natural” or “background” rate and is greater than anything that the world has experienced since the vanishing of the dinosaurs nearly 65 million years ago.

Chemtrails appear to have triggered climate feedback loops affecting ocean currents between the Atlantic and the Arctic. One of these feedback loops is methane expulsion. This methane expulsion has not been happening over a hundred years or even decades. It has been happening only over a few years. This is a global, game-changing event

They are posing health risks and disease to all life. They are creating artificial weather events and increasing the demand for the need of poisonous GMO stress resistant crops. Risks include: drought in Africa and Asia, continued ocean acidification from CO2. Ozone depletion. No more blue skies, and less solar power. It will increase warming if stopped, and can not stop quickly once started. Human error with toxic materials is hazardous as is unexpected consequences. Commercial control and the use of military technology also conflicts with current treaties. Questions about whose hand is on the thermostat are raised and  visibility into night skies are compromised.

Back To Top

Are there any personal health implications of chemtrailing?

“Particles in the PM2.5 size range are able to travel deeply into the respiratory tract, reaching the lungs. Exposure to fine particles can cause short-term health effects such as eye, nose, throat and lung irritation, coughing, sneezing, runny nose and shortness of breath. Exposure to fine particles can also affect lung function and worsen medical conditions such as asthma and heart disease.

Scientific studies have linked increases in daily PM2.5 exposure with increased respiratory and cardiovascular hospital admissions, emergency department visits and deaths.

Studies also suggest that long term exposure to fine particulate matter may be associated with increased rates of chronic bronchitis, reduced lung function and increased mortality from lung cancer and heart disease. People with breathing and heart problems, children and the elderly may be particularly sensitive to PM2.5.http://www.health.ny.gov/environmental/indoors/air/pmq_a.htm .

Back To Top

So why are they chemtrailing?

Clifford Carnicom lists 7 agendas and motives. There is no single answer.

1. Environmental modificationand control.

2. Biological operations.

3. Military operations.

4. Electro-magnetic operations.

5. geo-physical /global/planetary effects.

6. Development of surveylance/LIDAR.

7. Exotic propulsion systems.

The evidence he says is Dominance and Control.

Back To Top

Who benefits from chemtrailing?

The global ruling elite. Disaster Insurance Companies. Utility Companies. Property developers. GMO Corporations. The Industrial Military Complex. The Pharmaceutical Industry. Private Healthcare. GM Agriculture/Farming. Depopulation Programmes. Agenda 21.

Back To Top

What can I do about it?

Visit our Take Action page and chose your options.

Back To Top

What does partial cloud cover often look like today?

The skies today often have low lying clouds with a variety of chemtrails crisscrossing the horizon on any particular day. There is no schedule for these straight lines to appear. The deep blue sky of old has all but disappeared, replace by whiter skies and days of hazy particulate matter reducing visibility especially in the horizon.

Back To Top

What did partial cloud cover used to look like?

Search old photos form the late 60’s and 70’s to find more natural clouds in your families photo album and be aware of photoshopped propaganda subliminally inserting chemtrails into old movies and videos.

Back To Top

Help spread awareness:
Share on Pinterest
There are no images.

28 Responses to “FAQ”

  1. Caroline Hills5th September 2013 at 12:22 pm #

    Hi
    I’ve been reading a lot about Chemtrails recently and I’m trying to find out if any group or body has approached the Government about them. There seem to be a lot of groups and people watching what is happening in the skies but I can’t see whether anyone is taking immediate action. I’ve had a look on the Government website for petitions and it would seem 100,000 signatures are needed for an issue to be raised in Parliament.
    I intend to write to my MP about Chemtrails but wondered if you could give me any more information about any action being taken. I look forward to hearing from you. Many thanks. Caroline Hills, West Yorkshire.

    • Olga Raffa
      Chemtrails Project UK5th September 2013 at 3:35 pm #

      Hi Caroline,

      Thanks for your enquiry about political action on geoengineering here in the UK. It is a work in progress for us here at CPUK. We have been attempting to address this issue and have written The Directive to Ban Geoenginering via the UAPA for your use and guidance if you find it helpful. Please use and adapt to your liking. We are in the process of updating it into a new format and adding new information. In the mean time, please do go to the take action tab and feel free to follow our suggestions by sending it to your MP as it counts as a petition when signed and once submitted you can notify us and it will appear as submitted on a new database found at this link in the take action tab here: http://www.uk-skywatch.co.uk/Take%20Action.html Many MPs have received it and we are working on updating the information and uploading the database on our website here also.

      Do encourage anyone else you know in other/surrounding constituencies to do the same. Once all MP’s have received the Directive we will March To Downing Street to hand it to the Prime Minister personally with this petition also. We are constantly working on ways to lobby parliament with the help of an individual MP onside or possibly via a private members bill but need more help with this. Our team is growing and people are contacting us through various avenues and networks. We are also aware we can to go through a court of law, but have not found any lawyers that have been helpful so far. If you can offer any help with this or know someone who can, please email us at [email protected]

      Former MP David Drew and Norman Baker MP both asked for investigations into chemtrails but as the government does not acknowledge that geo-engineering is in effect or that chemtrails exist, this action has gone nowhere. EU action by a group called SKYGUARDS has been ongoing and they have written : A STATEMENT ON GEOENGINEERING

      Over much of the planet, for years, in fact decades now, aircraft have been seen flying at high altitudes, engaged in what – to countless concerned citizens, including parliamentarians and a few scientists and military people – appears to be chemical spraying. When attempts have been made to raise the question of “what is going on”, inquirers are given in response, officially and unofficially, descriptions of aircraft condensation trails and their properties. It soon becomes evident from dealings with authorities – everywhere – that citizens today are required to believe that what they are seeing in the sky is the traditional unintentional – and presumably not desired – pollution that has always been associated with jet air travel. It is not some kind of deliberate spraying. If people wish to believe that they are “being sprayed”, the burden of proof rests on themselves (because they are the ones who are “making the allegation”).
      All this changes when a new factor is introduced: a public relations campaign aimed at securing public acceptance for geoengineering” (and in particular what is called “solar radiation management”).
      For example: 1. http://harvardmagazine.com/2013/07/buffering-the-sun#article-images &nbs p; 2. http://www.geoengineering.ox.ac.uk/oxford-principles/principles/ ; 3. http://www.ies.be/files/20130628%20geoengineering%20governance%20-%20ies%20policy%20forum.pdf (examples could be multiplied at will)
      Under the precautionary principle, in such public relations campaigns, all burdens of proof rest on those who are canvassing for support for the practices in question. Those who want the public to accept geoengineering must persuade the public that what they say about it is true.
      The burden of proof therefore rests on the David Keiths, the Ken Caldeiras, the Oxford Geoengineeering Programmes, etc. etc. etc. to prove that they are not lying or misinformed when they say that “research on geoengineering is at a very early stage”, (asserting or implying that geoengineering, and specifically programmes of solar radiation management – possibly also serving other undeclared purposes – is/are merely a proposal and not a reality of historically unprecedented enormity, in full-scale global application).
      Because it is the advocates of geoengineering, not uninvolved citizens, who are initiating the discussion, citizens are entitled to assert the following:
      1) Any person or organization seeking to involve the public in a debate on the advantages and disadvantages of geoengineering techniques such as solar radiation management, or the global dispersal of light-reflecting particles in the atmosphere to reduce the level of sunlight reaching the earth, should be obliged to admit that such activity is already in global implementation, or prove that it is not. Wilfully false statements in this connection should be a penal offence, punishable by imprisonment.

      2) No person or organization in any way associated with assertions or insinuations that global warming/climate change is not anthropogenic in character should be legally entitled to advocate geoengineering methods as a means of countering anthropogenic climate change/global warming.

      3) Enforcement of the ENMOD Convention is a prerequisite for any attempt to secure “social acceptance” for any form of geoengineering.

      4) Enforcement of the AARHUS Convention is a prerequisite for any attempt to secure “social acceptance” for any form of geoengineering.

      5) No person or organization involved in any way with production of the problems for which geoengineering is being canvassed as a “solution” shall be entitled to be employed in implementation of any geoengineering programme.

      6) It is not acceptable that the moratorium on most types of geoengineering voted at Nagoya in 2010 at the UN’s Convention on Biodiversity should be violated and/or ignored.

      7) Penal sanctions should be attached to violations of the provisions of the ENMOD and AARHUS conventions.

      8) An international court for environmental crimes must be established, with the power to impose sanctions on offences against points 1) and 2) above, in addition to other already acknowledged environmental crimes.

      9) Geoengineers’ declared intention to “aim at legitimation through public involvement and transparency” lacks all credibility in the absence of any believable response to the present statement.

      The citizens’ organization Skyguards staged a conference in the European Parliament on 8th and 9th April 2013 on the issue of geoengineering and clandestine aerial spraying and have presented a formal demand for an independent investigation of facts reported in the conference.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_Modification_Convention
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aarhus_Convention
      http://www.handsoffmotherearth.org/2010/10/great-news-un-agrees-moratorium-on-geoengineering-experiments/
      http://www.skyguards-net.org

      Hope that helps Caroline. Good luck in writing to your MP.

    • Bob15th May 2014 at 1:06 pm #

      I tweeted all the major political parties here in the UK. No reply though.

      • Olga Raffa
        Chemtrails Project UK21st May 2014 at 7:47 pm #

        Thank you for doing that! More work needs to be done raising awareness.. keep up the great work. Face 2 face with a print out of the Directive or showing the movie “Why In The World Are They Spraying” Can help start the conversation.

  2. Caroline Hills5th September 2013 at 12:24 pm #

    In addition to my last comment I attach a video which you may or may not have seen for your interest.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3lW-TGGlk0

    Caroline Hills

    • Olga Raffa
      Chemtrails Project UK5th September 2013 at 3:36 pm #

      Thanks Caroline, this is an excellent interview with Russell Blaylock M.D

      • Caroline Hills5th September 2013 at 6:52 pm #

        Thank you so much for your email. Lots for me to think about and take action on. I will keep in touch. Thank you again.

      • John5th May 2016 at 4:01 pm #

        Chemtrailing all over Perth and Kinross today around 10ish first time seeing it mental took pictures. How is nobody talking about. Every body talking about voting for snp never mind the snp what about the sky scary.

        • James Hodgskiss
          James Hodgskiss5th May 2016 at 5:55 pm #

          There was a mainstream reference to it earlier this week on the Mirror website.

          My personal opinion is that there are many layers of distraction, of which chemtrails/geoengineering is somewhere in the middle…

  3. Caroline Hills7th October 2013 at 12:47 pm #

    I’m sending the Directive out to my MP but want to be really clear about the Unified Atmospheric Preservation Act. Do I follow instructions by Richard M Castle and sign all copies of the Act including “I…….do sign this draft of the UK adapted version etc”??? Or…do I just send it as is? Just want to make doubly sure. Thank you. Caroline.

  4. tony30th January 2014 at 9:35 am #

    where do post my replys from my local mp derek twigg and the minister of state department of energy and climate change (the rt hon gregory barker mp)??? pls post link so i can get this out there :)

    • Olga Raffa
      Chemtrails Project UK30th January 2014 at 3:10 pm #

      Hi Tony, Thank you for contacting us about your MP’s response. You can access our contact form via our “About Us” tab on our website, the “Contact Us” tab appears under it. http://www.chemtrailsprojectuk.com/about-us/contact-us/

      We will make this clearer for others in the future. We look forward to receiving your MP’s response so that we can add it to our status page found here: http://www.chemtrailsprojectuk.com/take-action/directive/status/

      Thank you for taking action. It is with good communication and engaging your MP on this issue over time that can have a positive impact on the outcome of this Campaign.

      As mainstream media is not making people aware of the issue your positive action is crucial to ensure success. MP’s know for every person contacting them it represents hundreds more that do nothing.. “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed, citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.” ― Margaret Mead

      As we continue to lobby Government, when it comes time to debating this in Parliament your MP will be voting from an informed advantage, not just from the Govt’s official stance which we refute in the Directive to start with. We recommend that you reply to your MP with some questions that we added on our update which is found on the status page.

      Make follow up appointments at your MP’s surgery from time to time for discussions showing him your own video and photographic evidence along with a rainwater test if you have done one. (http://www.chemtrailsprojectuk.com/evidence/rainwater-test-kit-results-map/)

      Discuss any other concerns you may have as it will keep them looking up and engaged on the issue. It will become apparent to MP’s if they have not noticed already, how artificially induced our atmosphere really is and making them reflect on this often will help.

      The update with questions on the status page reads:

      Update 25/01/2014: We have now added the following information to the cover letter that is sent with the message to each MP. This is to pre-empt any more inadequate responses we’ve been getting so far from too many MPs. Whether or not you have had a response from your MP, please raise these points with them: Continue reading:-
      http://www.chemtrailsprojectuk.com/take-action/directive/status/

      We hope this helps Tony and please contact us if you have any further concerns or requests.

  5. James4th September 2014 at 1:25 pm #

    Hi, I just thought I’d comment on the ridiculousness of this site and indeed the theory. I fly jet aircraft, I have seen colleagues pass me leaving contrails, they last as they are water vapour and particles from burnt fuel. The particles support the creation of clouds and due to the low air density which gives the required percentage of water for their formation. I have photographs of my aircraft flying at cruising altitude leaving lasting contrails and I know for a fact there is no system to dispense anything from the aircraft. In order for any additive to be released it would have to be introduced after the combustion chamber of the engine or it would be destroyed. There are no tanks on board the aircraft capable of carrying any substance in sufficiency quantities to have any effect at ground level let alone at up to 39000 feet. There are no dispensing nozzles for any substance. Strict engineering laws in the uk ensure that all parts of the aircraft are documented and pilots must know what is on boards.

    I feel I’ve wasted a few minutes of my life even trying to offer an explanation of why this theory is ludicrous but as some people are very gullible I thought I’d post anyway. I’m off to argue with the flat earth society, happy delusions!

    • CPUK26th September 2014 at 6:44 pm #

      It’s good to have your input, James. Whilst I’m not going to dispute your particular experiences and observations, would you be able to help me out with a couple of mine? You seem like a good person to ask.

      1. The first thing that got me into this movement was when I was out for a walk (it was about this time of year, approximately two years ago). I had heard about “chemtrails” – a term which I had dismissed for sometime as too extreme to be worth even considering. I had, however, noticed that there were an awful lot of planes flying back and forth (far more than I can recall as being normal) – nearly all leaving persistent trails (again, not what I could recollect as being normal). On this particular day, I see one of these “chemtrail” lines in the sky. This one is progressing towards me so I stop to watch it. I look at the persistent trail it’s left behind and notice it has what could be described as some kind of ‘malfunction’ half way down the trail – like a big cloud/puff of smoke. But what’s stranger is how the trail enters the puff on the right hand side and comes out on the left hand side (like the plane was running on a single engine, which went kaput, so then it switched to the engine on the other side). It seemed very strange, so I was naturally curious. So, like I say, this plane was coming towards me. And this thing was low – I would estimate around 10,000 feet. So low I could see the plane’s outline. It was not an ordinary commercial plane as it’s fuselage was huge. It looked like a tanker, but it had wings that looked more like those of a space shuttle. What it was, it wasn’t normal. Anyway, as it got even nearer, it was immediately obvious that the sound of this thing was not that of a jet engine (I live on the flight path the Manchester, about 20 miles away, so I know what planes should sound like – at most altitudes, including this one). The sound was an extremely powerful, multiple hissing/spraying sound. I’ve never experienced anything like that before that or since. So, my question to you, James: What did I experience?

      2. My second experience. A few weeks/months later, I was out in the middle of the countryside one Sunday morning. In the sky, it looked like a line had been drawn with a ruler. On one side, there was lovely clear blue sky. On the other, it was what I have become to learn is (through observation) complete artificial cloud cover created by the persistent, spreading trails of passing aircraft. Like I say, the boundary between the two was as if it had been drawn with a ruler. I noticed a plane approaching (from the cloudy side). It was leaving a persistent trail and I wondered to myself if the trail would stop when it reached the boundary. Sure enough, the trail stopped – but the plane kept going. If the persistent trail was just coming from the engine, they why did it suddenly stop so predictably like that without the plane falling out of the sky? Are the conditions that are required for persistent trails to form or not form really separated by perfect straight lines like that?

      3. Last summer, I started noticing black persistent trails for the first time. Open minded (as ever!), I considered maybe it’s just a trick of the light somehow and they’re not spraying anything new. Over the coming weeks, though, I kept my head up and I notice a plane flying past leaving a persistent trail. This trail is white, then it’s black, and then it’s white, and then it changes back to black again. Ordinarily, the plane is leaving a trail from each wing and I notice, on at least two occasions, that one side is white whilst the other is black. How can that be? Will you have me believe that was just an ordinary contrail, too?

      By the way, these aren’t theories. These are observations. And they are observations that the official explanation of “ordinary contrails” do not fit. This is why so many people are resorting to other theories – theories that (as you will see from the Directive) are supported by a range of other evidence and, therefore, fit the observations far better than what our government is serving up.

      • Clark17th March 2017 at 12:58 pm #

        CPUK, I’ve no idea what you might have seen as described in your first paragraph, but (1) such a craft would presumably count as evidence against the “commercial passenger aircraft spraying chemtrails” theory, and (2) an enormous tanker-like craft moving at subsonic speeds at low altitude, with tiny wings like the Space Shuttle designed for mach 10 at the highest altitudes, doesn’t seem airworthy to me.

        • James Hodgskiss
          James Hodgskiss18th March 2017 at 3:20 pm #

          Hello Clark,

          Thank you for your comment.

          (1) I don’t think it has any bearing on this. Just because this particular aircraft I saw was most probably non-commercial doesn’t mean they all are.

          (2) I don’t know about that, but I’m just saying what I saw – and heard.

          For the record, I’ve also seen a chemtrail plane accompanied by a very bright ‘orb’ (which was positioned in front of the aircraft, to one side) which disappeared from view as it went into a whisp of cloud but (unlike the plane) never came out of the other side. Now, I can’t explain that – but that doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. I mention it here because it’s the truth, but I won’t write a full article about it because – unlike the actual articles we publish – I can’t back it up with any other supporting evidence.

    • marley28th January 2015 at 10:44 pm #

      Hi James,
      I appreciate your comments but would also appreciate your explanation of the following. I live on the Isle of Wight and I know pretty much the activity of commercial aircraft flying over here from Flightradar. We are hardly Heathrow Airport and maybe have two to three planes flying directly over where I live every hour. So, maybe you could help explain why at any given time of the day I can look at the sky and see white plane flying over with a contrail that never disperses., or even more importantly why I regularly see four, five ….or recently eight flying above us, not in neat straight lines as a commercial plane would do, but back and forth over the same area. During these times you can clearly see these same planes retuning back to the mainland that are not leaving contrails ALONGSIDE a those which are. in addition, this will happen on the same days when commercial airlines are also NOT leaving contrails.

      Even if you do not “believe” in Chemtrails what is the explanation for all this activity in the air? Why can I clearly hear commercial airliners but not these planes. Why are commercial airliners not leaving the same trails as these ubiquitous white jets?

      We are not conspiracy theorists – like most people here, I saw the planes FIRST before seeking information on sites like this, I have watched the skies change from blue to white/grey and photographed up to 10 of these planes flying above my house at the same time. This is NOT normal!!!

    • Tony Browne11th February 2015 at 2:39 pm #

      James you have to be a sad Troll, who always seem to be pilots, funny that. Just wondering how much does screwing the human race pay? When it gets serious I hope evil scum like you are first in line.

  6. Lynn Walker26th September 2014 at 6:04 pm #

    Its 26.9.2014 and tonight in rural East Yorkshire the skies are covered in chemtrails. I have several photographs but cannot send them as I am not on Facebook or twitter. If you want to add them to your gallery I can email them.

    • CPUK1st October 2014 at 8:40 am #

      Thanks Lynn. I’ve just sent you an email which you can reply to with your photos. :)

  7. Dave Owen18th April 2015 at 8:11 pm #

    There is no point wasting time with trolls. I live in the Doncaster area. On Monday there were 60 Chemtrails over us. yet we are not on a flight path, Even the planes landing at Robin Hood, fly over Lincolnshire. Who is paying for this massive attack on us and who is doing it,

  8. Sarah5th May 2016 at 5:55 pm #

    So it poses significant risks, especially to our health. Are there anything precautions we can take for it not to affect us?

  9. Andrew Hale16th May 2016 at 7:34 am #

    Excellent site , well done ….

    It should be remembered the US government admits it’s doing this and teaches kids in school this is to prevent global warming….. http://www.viewzone.com/chemtrails22.html , I don’t believe for one moment that is the real reason.

  10. ANTHONY KAY13th July 2016 at 6:40 pm #

    basically all I WANT TO KNOW IS WHICH GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT IS AUTHORISING CHEM TRAILS. IS IT THE DEPT. OF ENVIROMENT OR DEPT FOR TRANSPORT OR MILITARY

  11. Chris15th July 2016 at 3:27 pm #

    5am 15th july beautiful blue sky in Bicker Lincolnshire until spraying begins! No more blue sky only cloud filled with poisons!!! Agenda 21 or 30 ? Let us all hope everyone wakes up!!

  12. Clark13th March 2017 at 2:12 am #

    I was born in 1963, and I remember vapour trails when I was a little boy. Sometimes they persisted and sometimes they faded away not far behind the aircraft, and sometimes there were none. I remember watching and being curious; I was (and still am) interested in technology. When I asked Dad, he said the trails came from the wing-tips rather than the engines. Now I know he wasn’t quite right, and they can come from both.

    Of course, there are a lot more flights these days; I think that’s why trails are more noticeable.

    The rainwater tests don’t tell us where the impurities came from, and you need some base-line to compare them against. If chemtrailing was really happening, atmospheric, rainwater and agricultural scientists etc. would have detected the chemicals. You’d expect to find discussions about that on their blogs.

    I wonder if you can use spectroscopy to analyse the trails?

  13. Clark13th March 2017 at 2:22 am #

    Why do most suspect governments? Most aircraft are operated by airlines, many of which are large corporations; private sector rather than public sector. The companies have a possible incentive; more global dimming would reduce global warming – the less warming, the longer until governments impose restrictions upon aircraft carbon dioxide emissions.

Leave a Reply

*