Look, up in the sky!

…could it be geoengineering?

I looked at jet contrails a lot back in the 1960's and 70's during my early teenaged years. I was using a telescope to follow the contrail until I was able to focus in on the jet or aircraft so that I could identify what type of aircraft and airline it was. I spent dozens of hours doing this simply due to my interest in becoming an airline pilot. From my observations back then, I can tell you that the contrails sometimes persisted for a very long time. Even turboprop aircraft left contrails behind them. Some days the contrails would be short and seem to disappear almost immediately. Sometimes they lasted from horizon to horizon. I also noticed that the contrails that persisted did not disperse or widen the way they seem to do today.

Contrails are the visible condensation trails that form behind aircraft at high altitudes when hot engine exhaust mixes with the cold air. The altitude where contrails become visible is generally above 20,000 feet where the air is cold enough. Contrails are composed mainly of water vapor and ice crystals, like the visible breath you see on a cold day. They are a natural byproduct of jet engine combustion and atmospheric conditions. And yes, when conditions are right, they will form cirrus clouds. So, in the classic sense, this is geoengineering because clouds are formed and will restrict the amount of solar energy that reaches the ground during the day, resulting in a measurable cooling effect. This will also prevent cooling of the earth’s surface at night due to a blanketing effect.

Is the creation of these contrails that form clouds being done on purpose over specific geographical areas to achieve an orchestrated result? Not yet in my opinion, but it can be done. Atmospheric conditions are known that will result in persistent contrails. Jet aircraft can be directed to fly at those specific altitudes to either create or prevent the creation of contrails to achieve a result. In my 33 years of experience flying jet aircraft for major airlines, the filed flight plan altitudes I was issued were based on favorable winds, turbulence avoidance, and fuel savings, not whether I would leave a contrail behind me. In fact, I could change my altitude at any time, traffic permitting. Commercial jet aircraft are not currently restricted to fly at altitudes that would create or inhibit contrail formation.

If a contrail lasts a short time, persists, or even appears at all, is dependent upon the water content of the airmass the jet is flying through. The more humid, the longer the contrails will last. This is observable by anyone who looks and critically thinks. When a weather system moves through and completely changes atmospheric conditions, humidity can substantially fall. All those jets are still up there at various altitudes on those crystal-clear blue-sky days, but they are not leaving visible contrails. As conditions change, sometimes you will see jets fly through different air masses, making it look like the contrail has been turned off and back on again. I can assure you that in my 3 decades of flying Boeing 727s, DC9s, DC10s, and Airbuses, there is no switch in the cockpit to intentionally turn something on and off that would produce that appearance in the sky. Internet pictures of contrail on/off switches are fabricated.

Further, I have seen pictures on the internet of small tubes above the exhaust area of jet engines. I have flown jets with those tubes. They are ports to allow seepage of fluids in the engine compartment to escape. Claims that these tubes are connected to cannisters that purposely spray something into the atmosphere are false. Here they are on an Airbus 319, an aircraft I have thousands of hours in:

The contrails decades ago appeared different for several reasons. First, the jet engines were pure turbojets, extremely noisy, sooty, and not very fuel efficient. Some pure turbojet engines still exist today on older jets like the 727s and DC9s that I flew. Most passenger jets today no longer have pure turbojet engines, but some military jets and small business jets do. Pure turbojet engines have a relatively low bypass ratio, which means that a significant portion of the air entering the engine goes through the combustion process. This produces high velocity jet exhaust with relatively high water vapor content. The contrails produced by pure turbojet engines tend to be shorter and narrower in appearance, with a denser, more focused trail of ice crystals. But high bypass jet engines, commonly used in modern commercial aircraft, have a higher bypass ratio due to the huge turbofan in front of the engine. This means that a significant portion of the incoming air bypasses the combustion process and is directed around the core of the engine, resulting in a greater mass of air being accelerated by the engine. This not only makes the engine quieter and more fuel efficient, but it causes the exhaust to contain a higher proportion of ambient air and a lower concentration of water vapor. As a result, the contrails formed by high bypass jet engines are wider, more diffuse, and can persist for longer periods. They appear more like thin, elongated clouds rather than narrow, well-defined trails. I have seen the differences myself from just a few thousand feet away at cruise altitudes.

Another reason they appear different is that years ago, navigation was point to point based on fixed navigational signals broadcasted from transmitters on the ground. Aircraft were required to follow the same airways in the sky. Recently, navigation no longer relies on signals from the ground. Aircraft today will fly directly to virtual fixes based on satellite GPS, or even inertial guidance that relies on no external signals. Aircraft with these capabilities fly in straight lines for hundreds even thousands of miles for fuel savings. This explains the parallel contrails you see today that did not exist several decades ago. In fact, many times pilots will intentionally offset their course by one or two nautical miles behind the aircraft they are following. This is called SLOP (Strategic Lateral Offset Procedure) and will make the contrails exactly parallel and very close. To the untrained eye, this will look like intentional spraying of something. We SLOP our courses to avoid wake turbulence and increase separation and safety. I have intentionally done this dozens of times and have also been directed by ATC to offset laterally.

The fact that there are many more aircraft airborne today flying direct to North, South, East, and West destinations will make flight paths intersect in x or # patterns all over the sky. This makes it look like certain geographical areas are being targeted. The military will still fly grid patterns on purpose, leaving a distinct checkerboard pattern. I have heard military aircraft talking to ATC that are flying these grid patterns. Grid patterns are training missions for search and rescue operations. I will say that if these military aircraft are intentionally spraying chemicals, we will never know unless a whistle-blower comes forward with undeniable evidence that it is being done.

Having said that, if you spot an aircraft below about 20,000 feet that is leaving a visible trail, something is most likely being sprayed from it. There are exceptions to that, however. Vapor trails or condensation trails can be seen coming from the wingtips of aircraft after takeoff or during landing when conditions are right. They can even be seen coming from propeller tips or even off the top of wings due to pressure changes that make moisture in the air become visible. The decrease in air pressure at the tops of wings, tips of propellers and from extended wing flaps will lower the temperature and saturation point of the air leading to visible droplets or ice crystals. See images here:

When aircraft depart and arrive at high density airports, they will follow the exact same tracks over the ground. These are called SIDs (Standard Instrument Departures) and STARs (Standard Terminal Arrival Routes). If the aircraft are high enough on these SIDs and STARS, usually above 20,000 feet, you will be able to see the contrails if conditions are right, and they will line up. If the weather starts slowing aircraft arrival rates, they will be put into holding patterns that look like racetracks in the sky. There can be stacking of aircraft in these holding patterns at various altitudes, making it look like intentional spraying of something is being done.

It is also possible for ATC to direct an aircraft to perform one 360 degree turn at high cruise altitudes up to 41,000 feet for spacing into high density arrival routes. This will leave a perfect circle in the sky, making it look like something is being intentionally sprayed over a certain geographical area. In my 33 years of flying commercial jet aircraft, I have been told to fly a 360 degree turn at cruise altitude dozens of times.

Having said that, I do know that purposeful geoengineering is something that patents have been issued for over decades. Just because patents exist does not mean they have been implemented. Patents show that there can be additives put in jet fuel that will make the contrails last a very long time, disperse, widen, turn into clouds, and ultimately affect the amount of solar energy that reaches the ground. The additives can include sulfur precursors that will act like the sulfur dioxide that blocks solar radiation after large volcanic eruptions. https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsta.2008.0131

The fact that what we see visible behind jet aircraft is widening and persisting for extended periods warrants an investigation of exactly what chemicals are in jet fuel. Further, if something is in the jet fuel that gets into the atmosphere, it would be more concentrated around airports due to less dispersion of it from higher altitudes. Studies would need to be done including sampling of soils, air, and water around these areas vs. outlying areas. The health of plants, animals and humans should objectively differ from those away from airports as well.

I have seen pictures of aircraft retrofitted with cannisters in the fuselage purported to be spraying chemicals into the atmosphere. Many of these pictures are containers connected to each other with pipes and hoses for moving water through the aircraft for weight and balance studies during test flights and proving runs for many larger aircraft. These tests are required for airworthiness certifications.

There may be a few aircraft retrofitted with cannisters that are experimenting with spraying various aerosols into the atmosphere. I cannot confirm they exist, I'm saying it is possible. David Keith, a physicist with energy and weather specialties has stated that it would only take 20 to 30 aircraft retrofitted to spray aerosols into the stratosphere to significantly affect the amount of solar radiation that reaches the earth’s surface. These aircraft could be military or privately owned.

The important question is, why would the government or private enterprises be purposely spraying aerosols into the atmosphere? Two reasons. Climate control or tracking the spread of potential pathogens. Both have been tried before without public knowledge. If they’ve done it before without your knowledge, they could be doing it again. It is challenging to determine the exact activities of military organizations as they often operate with a certain level of confidentiality. Let’s look at historically what has been attempted, starting with climate control.

Attempts to control the weather involve what is called cloud seeding. You must have visible clouds to seed. Claims that jet aircraft are “seeding” through their contrails with no visible clouds present below the contrails are ridiculous. The seeding traditionally involves the dumping of dry ice or silver iodide into visible clouds that contain vast amounts of moisture already, typically cumulus clouds. The idea is that the moisture will be induced to precipitate out in the form of rain or snow, weakening the storm. The first recorded attempt with seeding was called Project Cirrus in 1947. The project experimented with injecting dry ice into a hurricane. The hurricane, which had been tracking east and headed out to sea from Jacksonville, FL, reversed its path after it was seeded and made destructive landfall in Savannah, GA. Many blamed the seeding for this disaster, so the project was cancelled, and no more seeding was done for a decade. https://www.theblackvault.com/documentarchive/project-cirrus-hurricane-modification/

After observing and tracking hurricanes since that time, scientists concluded that it was upper air troughs that steered the hurricane that changed its course. Nevertheless, seeding began again in 1961 with Project Stormfury that lasted over 20 years, this time using silver iodide. Four different hurricanes were seeded; Esther in 1961, Beulah in 1963, Debbie in 1969, and Ginger in 1971. Although the testing showed promise, the official results were inconclusive. The emphasis shifted more toward hurricane research than seeding, and the project was closed in 1982.

The United States Air Force admits it ran Project Popeye in Vietnam from 1967 to 1972. Over 2,600 missions were flown to disperse silver iodide into clouds over the Ho Chi Minh Trail supply route used by the North Vietnamese forces. The hope was to extend the monsoon season and create muddy and impassable conditions along the trail. There is evidence it worked, however public outcry brought the program to a halt. A few years later in 1977, the United States, along with several other countries signed the Environmental Modification Convention to prohibit military use of environmental modification techniques for hostile purposes.

Spraying various chemicals into hurricanes would not be for hostile purposes. The billions of dollars hurricanes cost in damages and loss of life warrants efforts to diminish their intensities before they make landfall. President Trump and others even suggested bombing hurricanes to try to disrupt them. It is therefore possible that the military may have secretly dispersed various chemicals over the years into hurricanes to see the effects. Whistle-blower Kristen Meghan Kelly reported that the USAF had ordered vast quantities of Aluminum, Barium and Strontium oxides and sulfates. Since these are hazardous materials, when she tried to find out how they were to be used and disposed of safely, she was shunned. Could they have been dispersed into hurricanes? It would take an inside whistle-blower to answer that.

Consider that NOAA admits that dispersing hygroscopic materials into hurricanes may weaken them. Hygroscopic chemicals bind water vapor molecules. The thought is that injecting these particles into the hurricane inflow will cause the storm to rain out early, weakening the winds. Aluminum Sulfate, Barium Oxide and Strontium Oxide are hygroscopic. The problem is, the oxides become corrosive when hydrated and can cause skin, eye, and respiratory irritation in susceptible people.

There are laws on the books that are supposed to protect us from military experiments of any kind. It’s called the United States Code, the official codification of federal laws enacted by Congress. Title 50, Chapter 32, Paragraph 1520a of the US Code states that the Secretary of Defense may not conduct any experiment on the civilian population involving the use of a chemical or biological agent. But there are exceptions for peaceful purposes related to medical, therapeutic, pharmaceutical, agricultural, industrial or research activity. There is also an exception directly related to protection against toxic chemicals or biological weapons and agents. The SarsCoV2 virus was engineered as a biological weapon, and we all now know that the entire countermeasure program against it was an experimental procedure for emergency use only, devised under the direction of the military. The catch is, informed consent must be given to everyone who was to be administered the experimental covid-19 injection. That informed consent was not given to everyone. In fact, if you didn’t subject yourself to the experiment, you were considered a bad person and a threat to others. Along those lines of thinking, what’s to stop the government from spraying stuff without your knowledge into the atmosphere, rationalized as being for the good of humanity and the good of the planet?

Here’s what they have done over the years purposefully looking for health outcomes without your knowledge. Famously, the Tuskegee Study and the Guatemala syphilis experiments, were unethical medical research targeted studies conducted without the informed consent of the participants. However, these cases were not instances of deliberate spreading of pathogens to the masses by the government but rather instances of unethical medical experimentation.

Your government did in fact deliberately spread pathogens into the masses without your knowledge. As early as 1942, people in the War Department whose job was to be paranoid about security were worried about how wide-open and vulnerable the United States was. On their recommendation, President Roosevelt created America’s first biological warfare bureau, officially to study the country’s vulnerabilities and devise an appropriate response, should Japan, Germany, or, later, the Soviet Union ever get the idea to spray some germs around the U.S. Unfortunately, the bureau’s method of “assessing vulnerability” was to covertly attack those perceived vulnerabilities with germ warfare of its own. Over a period lasting 20 years, from 1949 to 1969, well-intentioned officials working for the Department of Defense repeatedly doused whole cities across America with chemicals, bacteria, and fungal spores that they were pretty sure would be “mostly harmless”. There were more than 200 tests “for the good of humanity”. Here are just a few.

Operation Sea-Spray remains a historically notable example of a biological warfare experiment conducted by the U.S. military without the knowledge or consent of the affected population. Here’s how that went down. On September 20, 1950, a US Navy ship just off the coast of San Francisco used a giant hose to spray a cloud of microbes into the air and into the city's famous fog. The military was testing how a biological weapon attack would affect the 800,000 residents of the city. The military did not inform the general public about the experiment, and the residents of San Francisco were unaware of the release of the bacteria into the air. The goal of the experiment was to observe the bacterial spread and potential contamination patterns.

During Operation Sea-Spray, the U.S. Navy released a cloud of a bacteria called Serratia marcescens into the air to study the dispersion patterns of potential biological weapons. The bacteria were thought to be harmless at the time, though later research showed that it could cause infections in certain individuals, particularly those with compromised immune systems.

After the experiment, several cases of urinary tract infections and pneumonia-like illnesses were reported among the public. It led to an investigation by the government, as well as concerns about the ethical implications of such experiments. The incident contributed to the development of guidelines and regulations for human subject research, including informed consent and oversight by institutional review boards.

Operation Big Buzz (1955): The U.S. Army conducted this test in Georgia and Florida, releasing over 300,000 mosquitoes infected with Yellow Fever virus to assess the potential for disease transmission in mosquito-borne warfare.

Operation Whitecoat (1954-1973): This series of tests involved exposing human volunteers, who were conscientious objectors, to various pathogens, including Q fever and tularemia. The aim was to study the effects of these agents on humans and develop medical countermeasures.

Operation Drop Kick (1966): In this test, Bacillus globigii, a supposedly non-pathogenic bacterium, was released in the New York City subway system to study the spread of contaminants in crowded urban environments. Turns out it was pathogenic for some people, no surprise, the immunocompromised.

One 1979 Washington Post news story discusses open air experiments in the Tampa Bay area involving the release of pertussis, or whooping cough, in 1955. State records show that whooping cough cases in Florida spiked from 339 (one death) in 1954 to 1,080 (12 deaths) in 1955, according to that story.

The military tested how a biological or chemical weapon would spread throughout the country by spraying bacteria as well as various chemical powders — including an especially controversial one called zinc cadmium sulfide. Low flying airplanes would take off, sometimes near the Canadian border, "and they would fly down through the Midwest," dropping their payloads over cities. These were visible, and the military said they were testing smokescreens to limit visibility to enemy bombers. That was a lie. What they actually were doing was gathering data on how biological or chemical agents could spread in different atmospheric conditions and geographic locations. It's important to note that these tests were conducted during a time when knowledge about the potential health effects and environmental impact of these substances was limited compared to current standards.

These types of tests were part of broader research programs in the mid-20th century, such as the U.S. military's biological and chemical warfare research. Many of these programs were conducted with limited public knowledge or understanding of the potential risks and implications involved.

It's worth noting that public awareness and concerns about the ethical implications of such tests have since led to increased regulation, transparency, and more stringent protocols for conducting research involving potentially harmful substances. Whether these regulations and protocols are being followed is subject to debate.

Notice that during these tests, some people were affected, and others were not. This is because you have an epithelial barrier that protects you from harmful things that can get inside of you. Do not get distracted from the real threat upon us. That threat is the willing and intentional injection of something called a “vaccine” directly through the protective epithelial barrier of your body, thinking that it will protect you from infection. It won’t.