Chemtrails: How in the World Are They Spraying?

By T.J. Coles
14 August, 2014.
In anticipation of Michael J. Murphy’s new film Who in the World 
is Spraying?—a follow-up to the masterful 
What in the World Are They Spraying? and Why…?
—this article asks How?
 military_chemtrails
Do these trails resemble commercial flight-paths?
Chemtrails are chemical trails released in the troposphere 
and/or stratosphere by unmarked jet aircraft under 
military control. Most of them are white, some are black. 
Unlike most condensation trails (contrails), chemtrails 
are laid in patterns impossible for commercial jets. 
They appear in all atmospheric conditions at all times 
of the year—in contrast to persistent contrails—and linger 
for hours, hazing blue skies to white.

Chemtrails are real. An Air Force Phillips Lab and Materiel 
Command geophysics acquisition document published in 1996 states:
‘Chemical and other techniques to mitigate deleterious 
ionization effects on GPS transmission will be tested 
and evaluated in FY97-99 … Measurements of effluent 
plumes and chemical clouds by ground-based and 
airborne Lidar will continue through FY99 … 
[Department of Defense will] Develop accurate 
and validated cloud and weather simulation 
for any world-wide location to support acquisition, 
training and war-gaming’.1

The date correlates to a US Congress budget allocation 
to the US Army and Air Force for a programme 
called ‘owning the weather’, published in 1996. 
To quote the budget report:
‘USAIC&FH [US Army Intelligence Center and 
Fort Huachuca] sponsors the Joint Army/Air 
Force tactical weather concept, which embraces 
the “Owning the Weather” initiatives of the 
Army Research Laboratory’s Battlefield 
Environment Directorate. These TRADOC 
[US Army Training and Doctrine Command] 
concepts describe how weather support to the 
future Army will be provided. They also describe 
the employment of IMETS 
[Integrated Meteorology System] with its 
capability to integrate information from national 
and indigenous sources to provide a 3-D 
of weather and environmental effects on 
and above the battlefield’.2
imagesDJVVRZLN
Erik Meijer, Member of the European Parliament, 
stated at the European Commission:
‘since 1999, members of the public in 
Canada and the USA have been complaining 
about the growing presence in the air of aircraft 
condensation trails of a new type, which 
sometimes persist for hours and which 
spread far more widely than in the past, 
creating milky veils which are dubbed 
‘aerial obscuration’, and that the new type 
has particularly come to people’s attention 
because it is so different from the short, 
pencil-thin white contrails which have been 
a familiar sight ever since jet engines came into use’.3
The dates (i.e., the late-1990s) correlate to the documented 
Pentagon programmes.
imagesUTCI1Z0N
In 2001, retired US Air Force sergeant Gene Shimer, 
who had served for four years in the Korean War 
as a radar technician, told his daughter: 
‘They’re gridding us up there’.
HOW THEY DO IT
The aeroplanes involved are non-commercial. 
They use afterburner jets. In the 1970s, the 
US National Aeronautical and Space Administration 
(NASA) tested the possibility of deliberately 
creating condensation trails with JP-4 jet fuel and 
no chemical additives. The author wrote:
‘The Sabreliner aircraft has twin jet engines each 
capable of consuming 1200 lb hr-1 of fuel. 
In the contrail experiments we used an engine 
setting which gave total fuel consumption 
rate of 1500 lb hr-1 and an indicated airspeed 
of 180 kt. Partial approach flaps were applied to
 jeep the aircraft level at this slow speed’.4
In other words, the jet was flying slowly in order 
to burn more fuel and generate more heat. 
The purpose is to raise the relative humidity levels 
to make the air conducive to contrail formation and persistence.
Scholars understood that adding chemicals to 
afterburners would give water vapour a substance 
to adhere to and thus persist in atmospheres 
where contrails cannot usually persist, unlike the 
above study, which chose an area known 
for contrail persistence, i.e. a mountainous region.

NASA filed a patent in 1973 for
‘a liquid fuel, in which barium salts are dissolved, 
and a high energy oxidizer which spontaneously
 ignites the fuel on contact. The barium 
release is accomplished by impinging fuel 
and oxidizer jets in an open-ended combustion 
[sic] chamber which expels the reaction product 
gases or plasma and which includes the desired
 barium neutral atoms (Ba°) and barium ions (Ba+) 
as individual species’.5
 barium1
It would be used in the upper atmosphere in order 
to detect electromagnetic radiation.
Others combined the idea of heat-generation, 
which could be attained by afterburners, and 
chemical additives. ‘An afterburner is in effect
 a ram jet added to a turbine jet engine’, write 
Gray et al. in a 1974 academic study for the University of Colorado.
‘[we could use] existing afterburner equipped 
jet engines with relatively simple modifications … 
Use of afterburner type jet engines to 
generate carbon directly. This alternative 
was considered by far the cheapest, 
most effective, most convenient, and 
safest alternative … An ideal aircraft would 
be a B-52 with its 8 afterburner engines, 
4 of which could be modified. Some re-piping 
of the fuel tanks would also be required. 
During take off all engines would be used 
in the normal manner. In the air 4 engines 
would be switched to carbon production … 
We have concluded that by slightly modifying 
readily available jet engines carbon dust 
particles could be produced and dispersed 
into the air at a rate of 20-30,000 pounds per hour per engine’.6
cb1
Gray et al.’s illustration of where carbon would 
be stored before being vaporized by afterburners.
Black_Chemtrail_over_Iraq_mp4_20140113_203435
People often film and photograph unmarked jets 
releasing black trails.
Gray et al. proposed using carbon black dust. 
Others have proposed using sulphur dioxide, sea salt, and aluminium.
In 2010, The Regulation of Geoengineering was 
published by the British government. Minister of 
State for Climate Change, Joan Ruddock, revealed 
that ‘there has been work on low level cloud 
development, which … has some Government funding’.7
imagesGGBG9GBT
In the previous years, scholars and engineers 
proposed methods for cirrus-cloud creation. 
John C.D. Nissen is quoted here as mentioning 
two of three geoengineering techniques 
in a proposal to the UK government preceding 
its ‘low level cloud devleopment’: 
‘main candidates include: 1) creating stratospheric clouds
 – using precursor injection to generate aerosols;
 2) creating contrails – using an additive to aircraft fuel’. 
Another submission from chartered engineer 
John Gorman, says: ‘it would be nice to investigate
 the possibilities of injecting the fuel/additive 
mixture into an afterburner’, referring to silica.8
 untitled
Illustration from a BBC report on proposed 
geoengineering depicting a plane spraying.
UNDER MILITARY PROTECTION
Referring to preliminary tests, Gray et al. explained:
‘The primary disadvantage of operating in 
the Mariana Islands is the large distance 
from the continental United States. 
If long lead time planning were accomplished,
 the Mariana Island location should prove
 to be satisfactory. Military transportation
 is available on a low priority basis. The primary
 disadvantage of the Florida Keys site
 is the large recreational tourist industry
 in this area. Precautions would have to be
 taken to avoid conflicts with private fishing boats
 in the dispersal area on test days. However, 
a large portion of the sea area likely to be 
affected is a U.S. Navy and Air Force 
operational training area subject to their control. 
This should facilitate coordination of the testing 
with local interests … The required raw material 
will have to be supplied in tank cars or tank 
trucks since the consumption will be large. 
(This does not apply to early stage testing wherein drums 
might suffice.)’9
This tells us that 1) the military would be 
involved in any chemtrail operations 2) 
the operations would not be disclosed to the public 
3) the chemicals would be transported by tankers, 
presumably to secret and/or secure military bases.
cb3
Gray et al.’s afterburner design.
In 2001, retired US Air Force sergeant Gene Shimer, 
who had served for four years in the Korean War 
as a radar technician, contacted the Military 
Operation Control at Travis Air Force Base in Fairfield. 
‘I said, ‘What would you say if I said there are three 
aircraft up there right now.’ I said, ‘Are they there?’ 
He [the controller] said, ‘No. They are not there’’.10
This author contacted the Plymouth UK radar station
 in 2012 to report the presence of four jet aircraft, 
which the operators denied.


NOTES

1. Air Force Materiel Command and Air Force Phillips
 Laboratory, ‘FY97 Geophysics Technology Area Plan’
, 1 May, 1996, Ohio: Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, 

2. The Federal Plan for Meteorological Services and 
Supporting Research: Fiscal Year 1997, June 1996,

3. Erik Meijer, ‘Parliamentary questions WRITTEN QUESTION
 by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission’, 10 May, 2007, E-2455/07,

4. R.G. Knollenberg, ‘Measurements of Growth of the Ice 
Budget in a Persistent Contrail’, Journal of the Atmospheric 
Sciences, October, 1972, volume 29, pp. 1367-74.

5. NASA and Paine et al., ‘Barium Release System’, 
US Patent, 3,751,913, 14 August, 1973,

6. Gray, W. M., W. M. Frank, M. L. Corrin, and C. A. Stokes,
 1974, Weather modification by carbon dust absorption 
of solar energy, Department of Atmospheric Science 
Paper 225, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO,

7. House of Commons Science and Technology Committee, 
‘The Regulation of Geoengineering’, Fifth Report of Session
 2009–10, HC 221, 18 March, 2010, London: Stationary 
Office, pp. 38, EV 28,

8. British Parliament, Innovation, Universities and Skills 
Committee: Geoengineering Inquiry (Geoengineering Case Study): 
Memoranda of Evidence, ‘Memorandum 16 [also listed as 115]: 
Submission from John Gorman, Chartered Engineer’, September, 2008, 
and ‘Memorandum 13 [also 152] Submission from John C.D. Nissen’, 

9. Gray et al., op. cit.

10. Lance Lindsay, ‘Californians Concerned Over Chemtrails’, 
World News Daily, 27 August, 2001,