NOTE: Here's an example of NASA's brainwashing: http://science-edu.larc.nasa.gov/SCOOL/contrails.html
There’s No Such Thing as a Persistent Contrail
by Ken Bradley
by Ken Bradley
This report summarizes my latest thinking based on observations of planes overflying the southwest Las Vegas area and documentation produced by various sources.
Many anti-chemtrail activists are uncomfortable with the term chemtrail and some prefer the term persistent contrail to describe the pluming and persistence phenomenon of jet exhaust. Calling what we see in the sky a persistent contrail is simply not valid based on the current state of atmospheric science. Take a look at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eWvwaOgP564 if you haven’t already watched this YouTube video and you can also visit http://www.watchthesky.org/ for additional information on why persistent contrails cannot form in the atmosphere.
The author of the video and the web site mentioned above says that persistent contrails cannot form unless the temperature is less than -40 degrees Celsius and the humidity is 60% or greater. This is basically true but since modern jet aircraft cruise between 32,000 feet and 39,000 feet the conditions for persistent contrails at those altitudes are less than -46 degrees Celsius and 60% or greater humidity. These conditions are mentioned in various documents produced by the Air Force/NASA/NOAA/EPA/FAA. When we see the pluming and persistence phenomenon are these conditions met? The answer is no and therefore by the definition of persistent contrails they cannot exist. So what is it that we are seeing? As uncomfortable as this is going to make a portion of the activists I’ll refer to what we are seeing as chemtrails.
To prove the above point for yourself take a look at http://weather.uwyo.edu/upperair/sounding.html and pick a sounding’s site close to where you are located. Data for a day is composed of two soundings, one at 00Z(ulu) and 12Z(ulu). To get data for a particular day choose data between 12Z on the day in question and 00Z on the next day. This is to adjust for Zulu or GMT time. Then look at the data between 195 hPa (39,000 feet, 390C) and 274 hPa (32,000 feet, 320C) and see if the relative humidity is 60% or greater when you see chemtrails in the sky.
For example, Saturday, 3-5-2011, was the worst day yet in Las Vegas for chemtrailing. The chemtrailing started at dawn and went to dusk. Every plane flying in the Las Vegas airspace was chemtrailing and spraying the old style, very persistent and very pluming chemtrails that spread out and completely covered the sky from horizon to horizon. It was a total overcast sky produced by chemtrails. Looking at 12Z data for 3-5-2011, 4AM local time, and 00Z data on 3-6-2011, 4PM the previous day(3-5-2011) local time, for site VEF we see the conditions at altitude at 4AM ranged from -62.7 degrees C and 38% humidity at 390C to -43.3 degrees C and 41% humidity at 320C and at 4PM the data ranged from -61.7 degrees C and 34% humidity at 390C to -41.7 degrees C and 41% humidity at 320C. Based on the criteria of less than -46 degrees C and 60% or greater humidity what we saw in Las Vegas on 3-5-2011 wasn’t persistent contrails, they were chemtrails.
Another reason not to use the word persistent contrail is that at any time the Air Force/NASA/NOAA/EPA/FAA can simply say they were wrong in defining the conditions necessary to form persistent contrails and simply say that persistent contrails can form at 5% humidity or some other low ball number.
Basically the term persistent contrail was cooked up because the planes were chemtrailing and the Air Force/NASA/NOAA/EPA/FAA had to come up with some concept to explain the pluming and persistence phenomenon of chemtrails. Then they had to dummy up some pseudo-scientific conditions and explanation for persistent contrail formation. This then could be used against chemtrail observations and would allow the Air Force/NASA/NOAA/EPA/FAA to say that chemtrails are a hoax. But, as has been proven, persistent contrails are a hoax.