Chemtrails, chemhaze and geoengineering.
On a cold and bright November day I looked up the sky, it was November 2011 and saw airplanes making trails from one part of the sky to another.
Trails that didn't fade but become bigger and expanded. That's when I started to take pictures. I lost somehow those pictures but have plenty of pictures from 2012 on.

No date stamp but putting my mouse pointer over tells me the date: 12-03-23 5:32 PM
March 23 2012

March 23 2012 --- 12-03-23 5:48 PM

For a while I just took pictures without date stamp and without knowledge of what the official name of chemtrails was and if there were scientific studies about them.
One thing I knew for certain  was that I never saw chemtrails the first 50 years of my life.
I encountered "chemhaze" over the island Crete on August 2001 and it was the first time that my solar grill which I had taken with me didn't work.
It was working fine in Finland for the previous 4 Summers even under partially clouded sky and it was working well on Crete the previous Summer.
Found the page of Carnicomand for the first time somebody mentioned scientific studies.
There was a link on Carnicom's page to the document but it was a dead link.
So I used the name of the document and did a google search and here it was:Heymsfield et al GRL 1998

"from water saturation above -38C to 75% RH (with respect to water ) at -55C"

Those figures I plotted using the numbers Heymsfield mentioned.
I needed to do more research and was looking for important keywords that could help me in my search.
Those magic words were: " saturation with respect to ice and supersaturation with respect to ice".
So after search further and downloading further pdf documents I made this page:
/pol/pages/Exposing Fraud.html
Of great importance was this find for me:
I found today the page but can't find it now but at least I found the graph's

150% supersaturation with regards to ice translates in 101% saturation with regards to water.
Under natural conditions. You add human made nuclei delivered via aircraft and the game changes. See pdf document RH_WMO ....

RH-WMO = RH with regards to water
RH-Standard = RH with regards to ice
Above 100% is "supersaturated"

100% saturation with regards to water would be 148.3% saturation with regards to ice and
100% saturation with regards to ice would be 67.4% saturation with regards to water.
I also encountered those two terms:
Heterogeneous ice nucleation and
Homogeneous ice nucleation
whereby the later seamed to occur at 150% with regards to ice. At -38C or -40C the document didn't say but it occurred at 100% saturation with regards to water at -40C I concluded
because of the above tables .
Then I fond this:
However, the formation of cirrus
requires higher relative humidity than for contrail persistence: Ice particles form from the abundant
small droplets by homogeneous freezing only at high relative humidity with respect to ice-saturation,
at RHi of the order 145 to 165 % or higher [39]. Also the formation of ice particles by heterogeneous
nucleation often requires RHi of 110 % or more [27] (with few exceptions such as desert dust particles).
Often, RHi is large enough to let contrails persist and develop into cirrus but not large enough to
let cirrus clouds form naturally. Since contrail persistence requires at least ice saturation, a sky full of
contrails but without natural cirrus shows that cases occur with humidity above ice-saturation but below
the threshold for cirrus formation.

Again, no temperature given.
So I took the smallest number "145% RHi " at -40C and made it even smaller by 5% and constructed the following table:

Then I wanted to know how often is homogeneous ice nucleation happening compared to heterogeneous ice nucleation?
Searching further I found this:
<backup here: fusina_etal07>
By constructing an
idealized profile from the measurement data the radiative properties of ISSRs and thin
cirrus containing ice supersaturation were studied. The impact of ISSRs on the surface
forcing is negligible but locally, within the vertical profile, changes in the heating rates up
to 1 K d1
for typical values of 130% relative humidity with respect to ice compared to the
saturated profiles are found. This is also important for the local dynamics within the
supersaturated layers
or homogeneous nucleation,
 which is probably the dominant mechanism for forming ice crystals at low temperatures
 (T<38C) relative humidities in the range 140–170% RHi, depending on temperature
<see my above Turquoise table>
[Koop etal., 2000], are required. For heterogeneous nucleation, the
freezing thresholds are smaller, probably in the range 110–140%RHi
< see my yellow table and add 10% to those figures or more. Divide figures by 10 and multiply with 11 >
Notice that I used the smallest figures to construct my grey table which represents homogeneous ice nucleation.
Notice also the following:
" the dominant mechanism for forming ice crystals "
Two things are now established:
1) homogeneous ice nucleation is the dominant mechanism and the RHi ( relative humidity with regards to ice ) is in the range of 140-170% whereby I used the smallest figure in my grey table.
2) Heterogeneous ice nucleation at 110-140% RHi at -38C
Now we need to know more about heterogeneous ice nucleation.
According to German scientists if the RHi is under 120% at -40C the ice crystals will not continue to grow and form a cirrus cloud or a spreading, persistent contrail.

Numerische Simulationen von Kondensstreifen und
deren ¨Ubergang in Zirren
der Fakult¨at f¨ur Physik der
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universit¨at M¨unchen
vorgelegt von Dipl.-Tech. Math. Simon Unterstraßer
aus Kraiburg am Inn
M¨unchen, Oktober 2008
Wichtige Ergebnisse der Simulationen sind, daß
hohe ¨Ubers¨attigungen von si ≥ 25% notwendig sind, damit sich der Kondensstreifen
ausbreiten kann (Jensen et al., 1998). Best¨atigt wird dies durch die Fallstudie in Gierens
und Jensen (1998), welche verdeutlicht, daß sich ein Kondensstreifen aufgrund
der geringen ¨Ubers¨attigung innerhalb einer halben Stunde aufl¨ost.
Kondensstreifen und flugzeuginduzierte Zirren sind oft gut beobachtbar, da sie in
ansonsten wolkenfreien Regionen existieren k¨onnen. Man kann daraus folgern, daß
Kondensstreifen in Regionen fortbestehen und sich ausbreiten k¨onnen, in denen die
Atmosph¨are die Voraussetzungen f¨ur die Bildung von nat¨urlichen Zirren nicht erf¨ullt.
Die Eisteilchen in nat¨urlich gebildeten Zirren entstehen meist durch homogene Nukleation.
Dazu muß die relative Feuchte in der Umgebung ¨uber einem Schwellwert
RHhom von > 145% liegen (Koop et al., 2000). Dieser Schwellwert ist als gepunktete
Linie in Abbildung 1.1 in Abh¨angigkeit von der Temperatur angegeben. Soweit nicht
anders erw¨ahnt, ist in dieser Arbeit immer die relative Feuchte RHi bez¨uglich der
Eisphase gemeint. Die ¨Ubers¨attigung si ist definiert als si = RHi − 1. Tritt heterogene
Nukleation (Vali, 1985; DeMott et al., 2003) auf, k¨onnen Eisteilchen auch bei
geringeren ¨Ubers¨attigungen entstehen (DeMott, 1990; DeMott et al., 1999; Gierens,
Cosmic rays and climate.
So according to Dipl.-Tech. Math. Simon Unterstraßer  if the RHi is under 125% the persistent contrail will fade away within the next 30 minutes and can not spread.
Die Eisteilchen in nat¨urlich gebildeten Zirren entstehen meist durch homogene Nukleation
Naturally grown cirrus is mostly created via homogeneous ice nucleation.
New tables created based on the research of Dipl.-Tech. Math. Simon Unterstraßer and other scientists. See here ....
Now a few words on how I created my tables.
All I needed to to do was  and spread knowing when ice saturation occurred.
For this I used the Vaisala humidity calculator. Use version 2.2 for best results.
Instead of using the saturation point ( no ice nucleation happens on the saturation point ) I used the frost point which is 0.1 points above the saturation point.
My yellow table displays the frost point.
Then calculating supersaturation was easy.
140% Supersaturation meant using the figures in my yellow table and multiply with 1.4
To calculate if homogeneous cirrus or contrail-cirrus are possible see my violet table and I used a RHi of 110% and not 125% as Unterstrasser is telling.
I did this because humidity moves up and down. Up and down.
I used down to counter the septics.
Now back to how my investigation continued.
At first I only took pictures.
Then I discovered that every country had an atmospheric sounding station which meant I actually could check the humidity and temperature of the upper atmosphere.
Soon I discovered we had contrail-cirrus and cirrus on to many days where there shouldn't be any because it was to dry and according to Simon Unterstrasser the humidity should be at least 125% RHi for persistent-contrails  to persist and spread.
He also tells that only in maximum 70% of all cases will the crystals grow and spread because the up drift needed isn't there.
So even when the RHi is high enough only in 70% of all cases we should see spreading persistent contrails or heterogeneous ccreated cirrus.
Oops drifting again:
Back again to my work.
Taking pictures, comparing them to the data of the sounding station.
Then come the discovery of flightradar24
Now I had the change to check out the planes flying over my town and flightradar24 tells me their altitude.
I compare then the data of flightradar24 with the data of my nearest sounding station and I notice far to often that it was to dry and a persistent-contrail should not have formed but it gets more interesting.
As the plane fies under a cirrus cloud I know now that the cloud is above the airplane and since I know the planes altitude.
So back to looking at the data of the sounding station and to often I discover that while the RHi is high enough for cirrus it isn't high enough on the altitude of the cirrus I just took a picture of.
But the adventure continues because now I discover that planes don't leave always a contrail and the temperature was very low and we had a high humidity too.

Collected the sounding data of an entire month. < September , October, August, July, ..
Every time it is to dry for persistent contrails marked green.
If persistent but not spreading contrails are possible mark it yellow
If  heterogeneous ice nucleation aka spreading persistent contrails are possible mark it violet.
If humidity is high enough for homogeneous ice nucleation aka natural cirrus mark it grey.
Now lets compare homogeneous ice nucleation formed cirrus with heterogeneous ice nucleation created cirrus.
Their relationship should be the very least 1 to 1
For every day we see heterogeneous ice nucleation created cirrus we should see homogeneous ice nucleation created cirrus.
Check your monthly sounding data and your pictures. You will discover this is not the case.
You will have 20-50 times more cirrus created via heterogeneous ice nucleation than homogeneous ice nucleation.
See " September 2013 Summary " and July and August & October & November &

The BIG one are not chemtrails.
Kucinich mentioned them in his " Space preservation Act " of 2001 but HAARP and it's use as a weapon.
Who else mentioned HAARP or the weather being used as a weapon?
See here "baby steps ".

Personal history with "persistent-contrails" and "contrail-cirrus"
Taking pictures.
Adding a time stamp.
Adding atmospheric sounding data.
Using tables in regards to persistent-contrails contrail-cirrus and natural cirrus.
Having and using scientific and non-scientific documents in regards to cirrus, weather modification and others.
Creating monthly statistics to weed out chance. < July .. August .. September .October ...>
Weather as a weapon. See "baby steps ".
To dry for persistent-contrails: < July .. August .. September .October ...>
To dry for cirrus or contrail cirrus: < July .. August .. September .October ...>
Taking pictures of airplanes only to discover that:
It was cold and humid enough for contrail but the plane left no contrail.
The plane was flying under cirrocumulus but according to it's altitude and the sounding info those clouds were at an altitude that was far to dry for cirrocumulus.
Collecting pictures and sounding data from around the world only to discover the ongoing geoengineering is much worse in other parts of the world.
Besides uploading all that info to my webpages and informing others on the Internet,
Every time I take a walk or go to a bar I take my album with me and inform people.
I am a vegetarian and detox twice a year.
Spread the info.
Back to Index