Correcting Contrail Narratives Part IV-Threading the Lies into the Tapestry of Trails

Correcting Contrail Narratives Part IV-Threading the Lies into the Tapestry of Trails

by Raphaëlle O’Neil, TLB Contributing Author

So far in the Correcting Contrail Series we learned why all contrails matter (1), corrected the narrative on the history & potential of the persistent contrail (2), and explored why, even with an inadvertent contrail pollution problem, it’s important to allow for the possibility that there could indeed be a deliberate, large scale, weaponized albedo modification program hiding in the trails (3), as well. Now we’re ready to explore how one could go about threading the lies of a covert program into the tapestry of trails, so as to exploit, if one were so inclined, and hide behind the “shade” of uncertainty & plausible deniability provided by the phenomena of this tapestry’s well-noted historical occurrence (however “natural” they may be).

First, it would be helpful to define the conditions in which a contrail could form, persist & spread versus those in which they dissipate. Asking a local meteorologist at WDSU in New Orleans, to define those conditions precisely, we got a vague and non specific answer (which was partially incorrect), and because she could not clarify further, referred me to the National Weather Service. They quoted vague answers, composited from the EPA/FAA/NOAA/NASA fact sheets (4, 5, 6, 7, & 8), as well.

What causes a contrail to form?
A contrail will form if, as the airplane exhaust gases cool and mix with surrounding air, the humidity becomes high enough (or, equivalently, the air temperature becomes low enough) for liquid water to condense on particles and form liquid droplets. If the local air is cold enough, these newly formed droplets then freeze and form ice particles that make up a contrail. Another factor that influences contrail formation is engine fuel efficiency, which affects the amount of heat and water emitted in the exhaust plume.

What conditions cause contrails to persist and spread?
If the surrounding air humidity is high, the contrail will be persistent. Newly formed ice particles will continue to grow in size by taking water from the surrounding atmosphere. The resulting contrail extends for large distances behind an aircraft. Persistent contrails can last for hours while growing to several kilometers in width and 200 to 400 meters in height. Contrails spread because of air turbulence created by the passage of aircraft, differences in wind speed along the flight track (high wind will spread a contrail – they are dispersed by vertical and horizontal wind shear) , and possibly through effects of solar heating.

What conditions cause contrails to dissipate quickly?
After the initial formation of ice, if the surrounding air humidity is low, the contrail will be short-lived. Newly formed ice particles will quickly evaporate. The resulting contrail will extend only a short distance behind the aircraft.

The surrounding atmosphere’s conditions determine to a large extent whether or not a contrail will form after an aircraft’s passage, and how it evolves, spreads, or dissipates.”

IS it only the “surrounding atmosphere’s conditions” that determine the variances? What about the “engine fuel efficiency” mentioned?

“Measurements of the Growth of the Ice Budget in a Persisting Contrail”, by R. G. Knollenberg, (9)(written in 1972) is a revealing document on a study of the ice budget of a contrail, with the following passage about what it takes to produce a contrail in order to conduct the experiment:

“The experiment simply involves the use of a jet aircraft with controlled engine performance factors to produce a contrail under conditions favorable to its growth, and then make repetitive sampling penetrations orthogonal to the flight track.”

So the engine does control the contrail formation along with certain pre-existing atmospheric conditions! And jet fuel. But we have explored that already in our second story.

In this 2007 Royal Meteorological Society’s paper titled, “Evaluation of the use of radiosonde humidity data to predict the occurrence of persistent contrails” by G. Ra ̈del and K. P. Shine (10), we read:

“Contrails form when hot and moist exhaust mixes with cold, drier ambient air; this increases the relative humidity (RH) and can lead to water saturation if the ambient air is below a critical temperature Tc. The critical temperature is given by the Schmidt–Appleman criterion and depends on the ambient pressure, humidity and temperature as well as engine dependent parameters. If the air is subsaturated with respect to ice, contrails persist for no more than a few minutes. However, in the case of supersaturation with respect to ice (RHice > 100%) contrails can persist for up to several hours and can eventually even evolve into extended cirrus clouds that are indistinguishable from natural cirrus.”

“Engine dependent parameters”? “Engine fuel efficiency”? “Controlled engine performance factors”??

No wonder meteorologists can not give you specifics- there are too many variables! So then how can they be sure those are just contrails, when we call up complaining about chemtrails??

THEY CAN’T. Not with such undefined parameters and vague language. Their conclusion is based on their own bias.

Engine parameters aside, even if it were solely atmospheric conditions that determine the likelihood and extent of contrail formation, why then are we given only a vague definition of the conditions that allow contrails to form and change over time, as opposed to a precise humidity-to-temp ratio chart, such as the Appleman Chart (11) once provided the military to help predict the likelihood of contrails in the 50’s and 60’s?

The Appleman Chart sites specific ranges of probability of occurrence and persistence based on the range of conditions there could be.

Reading The Appleman Chart:

• Temperatures above -34o + “X” RH (any %) = No contrails.
• Temperature below -44o + “X” RH (any %) = Always contrails.
• Maximum temperature of -41oC is required for persistent contrails (“Max T for Persistence”). As seen in the chart this tracks very closely with 60% RH with dropping atmospheric pressure/rising altitude narrowing the range between Temperature and Relative Humidity as the two prime factors responsible for persisting contrails. As temperature rises & RH drops below 60% there isn’t enough moisture for persistence despite still being cold enough to form. The narrow range of “Maximum Temperature for Persistence & 60% Relative Humidity are closely correlated, thus defining a very narrow gamut for persistence of condensation trails from jet powered aircraft.
• Regardless of RH% there will always be contrails below -44oC. But notice that temps below -44oC correlate to dropping RH, thus moving away from and narrowing the range of conditions for persistence, i.e. it is cold enough to form a contrail but not for it to persist.
• All said, there is a very narrow range of conditions for “persistence”:

The problem is, the Appleman Chart criteria, apparently no longer applies today, because engines are different.

Believers of chemtrails claim they can prove the contrails are weaponized, because turbo jet engines should be making less contrails. Contrail normalizers claim the opposite is true, that they should be making more. Which one’s correct is a DEAD END ARGUMENT. It is far better to stop arguing and take the official narrative at face value and make it defend or amend itself then make your own claims-

Why are they making engines that make MORE clouds when they have known for over half a century that contrail cirrus affects the weather??

When my team tested (12) the conditions as per the Appleman Chart criteria defines, and found the trails to be persisting unnaturally, we were told by chemtrail debunkers we needed to take into account the ISSRs- Ice Super Saturated Regions. Having never heard of it, we looked it up, and found it more than slightly odd that it would be absent from the NOAA Glossary of Meteorological Terminology (13), considering it ends up being the prime element required for creating persistent contrails.

These ISSRs- and jet fuel, AND engine performance factors- explains why people have seen contrails persist when they shouldn’t have by Appleman criteria.

In the document “Ice-Supersaturated Regions” by Peter Spichtinger and Klaus Gierens (14), we read-

“A good marker of ISSRs is persistent condensation trails (contrails) when the sky is otherwise free of clouds. Since the mixing process in an aircraft exhaust plume can create very high degrees of supersaturation even in dry ambient air, the formation of contrails does not require as high ambient humidity as the formation of natural cirrus. Contrails can therefore decorate the sky when no cirrus clouds are around. Contrail persistence however requires at least ice saturation. A sky full of contrails but without cirrus therefore shows that there must be an ISSR.”

So here we all were, arguing what “color of paint” was coming out of the exhaust- chemical vs. water vapor, to use a paint metaphor? But in actuality, Not only is it BOTH, but the paint was creating the very canvas & tapestry for all other paints to cover!

Not only are persistent contrails a good marker of ISSRs in generally cloud free skies, but the “mixing process” in the aircraft exhaust plume can create contrails by creating the conditions required for contrails to persist via supersaturation, even in dry air, as jet cirrus require less humidity than natural cirrus to form.

While some people claim to have caught planes delivering payloads (or dispersing dirty jet fuel, as the case may be) that were not on documented flights, others have noted regular commercial flights laying persistent contrails down. Learning of contrails’ role in forming the very rivers of ice (ISSRs) needed for contrail persistence, we can now see –

ALL that is needed to create deliberate desired albedo modification is to send a fleet of planes ahead of schedule of the desired effects to PRE-TREAT (super saturate) the atmosphere for most all other plane contrails to mix with later.

These contrails and artificial metal clouds are the plasma layer and canvas on which all other engineering can operate off of. As it turns out , it is completely possible and relatively easy to conduct undetectable rogue albedo modification and geoengineering.

Our local meteorologist dismissed our jet cirrus concerns as “just” water vapor as if that were all we were dealing with. Though she admitted she thought contrails were a pollution problem, she and the lady she referred me to at the National Weather Service, both said it was neither of their jobs to report to the public about artificial clouds or climate engineering. Exactly WHO’s job is it, then? I asked, with the sound of Crickets echoing back. I am not holding my breath waiting for the answer.


Jim Lee offers us a solution to the problem of climate engineering, with a “Clarity Clause” (15).

“A draft legislation to end atmospheric modification without notification:

When weather warfare was banned at the Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques (ENMOD) in 1976, NO VERIFICATION REGIME WAS EVER CREATED. We cannot detect rogue geoengineering, cannot verify cloud-seeding projects, or even predict the weather with any certainty because ‘too many hands are in the cookie jar.’

The global warming climate scientists would have you believe that destructive weather can surely be blamed on CO2 while never mentioning daily weather experiments overhead. This is insanity.

We demand verification of the ENMOD ban by building a global sensor network to detect intentional and unintentional weather modification sources as well as detect all atmospheric chemical releases. In addition, we will amend ENMOD to require atmospheric experiments be publicly announced prior to initiation”

This is an excellent and powerful start! We must begin monitoring and holding those responsible for experimenting and exploiting technologies & the earth’s atmospheric resources, as if it were their own, accountable for the weather events they create. Deliberate or accidental we need to ALL look more openly at cloud pollution, at the lies that minimize the significance and scale of the contrail problem that has grown along side the age-old stated intent of harnessing the energy potential of these clouds. IF we can get people to realize that contrails matter, and that the systemic avoidance of this conversation in the public specter is beyond suspicious, it is pathological and intolerable to those of conscience & heart, then maybe just maybe, that will open up greater public scrutiny in this field, making it harder to weaponize weather against us.

We have done much, in this series, to begin mending the contrail/chemtrail narrative, but, because it is crucial we explore such an important subject honestly and thoroughly, have further questions…

Are there any other sources for these RIVERS of ICE (ISSRs) that are now increasingly abundant in our skies? Is there another source of anthropogenic clouds besides contrails? Is there possibly some other way to detect rogue geoengineering?

YES, there is, though with all this talk of contrails vs chemtrails, we nearly missed it. There does happen to be a massive heat and water vapor source spread throughout the world- Power Plants (16), the other source of anthropogenic clouds (17) and moisture in the atmosphere. We shall expose this most taboo of all climate engineering narratives- ground based anthropogenic cloud & weather makers. Pinpointing Power Plants (18) & Nexrad on radar (19), we’ll prove that naming ground based weather makers (20) may be a lot easier than trying to identify the culprits making clouds by jets, in conjunction with potentially “closed” and hard to reach facilities in Alaska. Stay tuned!


About the author:

Raphaëlle O’Neil is a climate engineering awareness activist & educator, and author of the children’s chemtrail book “Funny Clouds: A Chemtrail Tale”, illustrated by Sean Gautreaux. [See video review below] She is also a massage therapist, who’s passion for liberty has made her a freedom fighter going back her whole life, but after surviving recent assaults on the environment after Katrina and the BP oil spill, she renewed her commitment to ringing the alarm on various pressing environmental issues.

Because no safeguards to a clean environment can be made without the right to freedom of speech, she was forced to defend herself against such tyranny by going up to bat for the constitution of the Unites States of America, which she did by being Press Chief for P.A.N.D.A (People Against the National Defense Authorization Act) until the birth of her child.

Podcast: Though she covers multiple issues on her podcast Beyond the Veil on her nolabutterfly youtube channel, ranging from free speech, mind control, and other shady government cover-ups, she is primarily focused on climate engineering and the way it is being used to advance the globalist agenda we see unfolding today.

She is currently working with others to change the chemtrail narrative into one that holds anthropological cloud makers responsible for the effects of their creations…regardless of the intent… driving the making of clouds in hopes of forcing greater scrutiny, integrity & accountability on the part of the public at large.

Raphaelle is a contributing author and researcher at The Liberty Beacon Project.

Book Review: Funny Clouds – A Chemtrail Tale from Harold Saive on Vimeo.

Reference links:





















 Follow TLB on Twitter @thetlbproject

1 Comment on Correcting Contrail Narratives Part IV-Threading the Lies into the Tapestry of Trails

  1. After personal and considerable research and observation into the science of contrail formation, I feel the conclusions in this article accurately encapsulate both the questionable science and its imprecise and muddleed narratives concerning “jet cirrus”. These narratives are at best confused thinking on the part of those who are supposed to understand the science (meteorologists & weather readers, climate scientists and public officials charged with public safety). At worst it is a narrative fabricated by the deep state of which the above mentioned professionals are not aware, thus their own confusion and parroting of the “official science” narratives… which, as you’ve demonstrated make no real sense or display any scientific certainty. Kudos on sussing out the ruse of contrail vs. chemtrail !!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.