So my dad got into the chemtrail conspiracy theories. Actually, he doesn’t really have a specific conspiracy theory, just the idea that contrails these days are different than in the past (when he was a kid, for example) and that something fishy may be going on based on that evidence.
I wass looking through some old threads that talk about contrails and in one of them a poster mentioned that there was an opportunity to look at the effect of contrails on weather during the period following September 11th, 2001 when pretty much all flights were grounded.
This got me thinking, how old are the chemtrail conspiracy theories? I seem to have only heard of them following September 11th, but then I don’t pay too close attention to conspiracy theories. It occured to me that these conspiracy theories may have come about in connection with the lack of contrails following September 1tth. Perhaps someone read about scientists studying what happened and got to thinking.
I realize this is sort of nebulous, but what I am curious about is when the theory first came about.
Oops, my bad! I’m terribly sorry, I should have looked at the link to Cecil’s article posted in the thread linked to above (article ), it talks about contrail conspiracies and it is from 16 june 2000.
So my question is already answered. So sorry for the unecessary post. I am still interested in the origin of the chemtrail stories.
There’s an effect called “Global Dimming” caused by increased particulates in the atmosphere, which in turn contributes to increased cloud formation. Apparently chemtrails are a significant factor. PBS did an hour show on this within the past week.
Contrails are probably a bit different because jet engines are designed a bit different these days. I was watching footage of the old B-52 on the military channel a couple of weeks ago and was amazed at how much smoke came out of the engines on the original model. Similarly, the jet engines on passenger jets was also a lot more “smoky” in appearance in the 1970’s. I wonder how much this comes into play in the difference between contrails 30 years ago vs. contrails today.
Just a guess, but I think contrails probably are somewhat different in character from those in the '50s and '60s, not that I believe in the “chemtrail” myth.
IIRC, contrails mostly represent the formation of ice crystals from moisture in the air first being compressed and heated as it passes though the engine and fan, and then freezing again as it exits the exhaust. The ice crystals and any particulates in the exhaust serve as sites for accretion of more ice from the moisture in the surrounding air.
The reason the exhaust from older turbojets looks so smoky is because most of the air moving through the engine passes through the combustion chamber, picking up residue from the combustion process on the way. With the high-bypass turbofans used in the majority of modern commercial aircraft, however, much of the thrust is developed by moving air through a large fan driven by the engine, rather than through the engine itself, hence relatively less ‘smoke’ in the exhaust relative to the air being moved through the fan. There is probably some effect from more complete combustion due to the engines being made from materials with higher temperature ratings, as well.
Maybe the great overall volume of air moved through a modern turbofan results in larger amounts of ice crystals being formed, and therefore larger and longer-lasting contrails.
As for when the “Chemtrail” rumor began floating around, I first became aware of it when I began exploring the Internet around the mid-90s. Don’t know if it existed before that.
And let’s not forget those contrails from the 30s and 40s!
Just a quick aside: contrails form in the right conditions regardless of whether the aircraft is jet or piston powered. I love those WWII photos of B-17 formations trailing big fat contrails. Of course the aircrews had a different feeling for them. Nobody likes flying a combat mission with a big white arrow pointing out your plane’s position.