When I say artificial, I mean produced by an airplane, whether its condensation OR chemical....
OK, I will try this: Reading that "quote" above, I ask (as I do often): "
What sort of 'material
' is there that could possibly be used to EXACTLY mimic what those of us who are experienced in aviation see as perfectly ordinary and typical contrails?"
I mean this: The burden on the "chem"trail claimant is to provide the evidence of ANY such material or "chemical" that is indistinguishable from
cirriform type contrails. Also, noting that YES the presence of airplane-produced persistent contrails CAN result in an increase of cloud coverage, even to the point of an overcast sky, but also
the same sort of high altitude cirrus overcast sky can occur quite naturally, and does all over the world.
I began learning to fly in the 1970s. Airports with a control tower issue an hourly weather report, and back then (and still today) it called the
ATIS. The ATIS can contain other vital airport details as well, but let's just focus on the weather aspect.
The ATIS is listened to by a pilot(s) prior to departure, and prior to arrival. There are also
other sources of weather, such as the
METAR, and is a world wide International standard format (with some allowances in N. America for slight variations). Cloud reporting details:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/METAR#Cloud_reporting
Why did I inundate you with all of this technical info (just the tip of the iceberg of what aviation professionals know)?
Leading up to this: Note the right side of the chart under the heading "
High Clouds":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/METAR#WMO_codes_for_cloud_types
This is not a "new" type of cloud classification in the field of aviation. I have, in my 40 years, seen printed weather (or heard on the ATIS) of sky conditions where the only clouds mentioned were cirrus, at 20,000 or even 30,000 feet. (These altitudes are possible for a trained weather observer to estimate with some accuracy, based on visual identification of cloud types, and other information available to hand...including actual pilot reports in the vicinity).
NOW....to the notion of a "chem"trail. I asked about what could replicate the appearance of a contrail. I need to throw a little math and geometry at you.
Picture just one contrail that is 50 feet diameter. And let it be only one mile long (6,076 feet is one Nautical mile). An airliner typically cruises at 450 knots to 480 knots. ("Knot" is Nautical miles per hour). This results in a rate of travel over the ground of 7.5 to 8 Nautical miles per minute.
SO you see, that "one-mile-long" will form in less than a minute....8 seconds at 450K, or about 7.5 seconds at 480K. Agreed? (I divided by 60 minutes per one hour, then again using 60 seconds in one minute to derive these figures).
OK...now, the cylindrical contrail. The volume of a cylinder is here, handy online calculator:
http://www.mathopenref.com/cylindervolume.html
Plugging in the numbers, we arrive at a figure of 11,930,198.102 cubic feet ("radius" = 25, "height" = 6,076). Let's round it to 12 million cubic feet....in only 8 seconds? Sure, that's how it works, since the moisture is already in the atmosphere, and thus a contrail can form.
But, just what could be carried by an airplane to reproduce that? 12 million cubic feet, taking the cube root, we get a "box" (for comparison) that is about 229 feet on each side. This would be the same as an approximately 20-story tall building, with a base that is 229 feet square.
Think about it.