Mick West, Owner of Contrailscience, lies once again. Please be aware!


I consider this as proof of another chemtrails debunker inconsistency. Chemtrails debunker often claim that contrails was made of water vapor. This is a false statement.

The story started when I posted to facebook about: “Anyone who says that contrails are made only of water vapor is shill.”. Then Mick West responded, 4 August 2012:
“But there’s lots of aerosols in the atmosphere anyway, that’s how natural clouds form.
Contrails would form even if there were no soot in the exhaust. The main thing is the water in the exhaust.”

Screen shot:

In response to my response of:
“My reference mentions that aerosols are required.”

He answered:
“No it does not. It says aerosol is important. The large amount of aerosols in the exhaust does change the properties of contrails, but it is not required. A contrail would form anyway, just one with different crystal density.

Consider a pure hydrogen engine. It would produce no aerosols, just water. And yet a contrail would still form.

Aerosols MUST be in the air already otherwise there would be no clouds.”

Screenshot:

 

His statement is scientifically wrong:

NASA – Contrails Education – Contrails Science
“The exhaust of an aircraft contains both gas (vapor) and solid particles. Both of these are important in the formation of contrails. “

Contrails: What’s Left Behind Is Bad News
“Tests were performed with a NASA jet aircraft examining the effect of sulfur levels in jet fuel exhaust. During the airborne test one engine was run on normal jet fuel and the other engine was run on fuel that emitted exhaust with a lower sulfur content. The high sulfur engine, representing most jet engines on modern commercial aircraft, produced a contrail that lasted through a larger range of temperatures and formed faster out of the engine. The low sulfur engine did the opposite. “Aircraft generate an invisible aerosol trail which enhances the background level of condensation nuclei, in particular regions with dense air traffic at northern latitudes and near the tropopause”.”

a collection of papers presented at the 14th International Conference on Nucleation and Atmospheric Aerosols, Helsinki, 26 – 30 August 1996.
“A series of experiments has been performed observing contrails formation of twin-angine jet aircraft (ATTAS-VFW 614 and Airbus A310-300) run with different sulfur containing fuels on the two engines at the same time. The fuel sulfur mass content was varied from 2 to 5500 ppm. The results suggest that contrails particles form mainly from soot particles. The higher the sulfur content the more the soot particles get activated as condensation neclei.

http://science-edu.larc.nasa.gov/SCOOL/pdf/Kiwi_Kids_Cloud_Guide.pdf
“Contrails are formed when particles from aircraft jet engines mix with the water vapour in the air. The water vapour condenses and freezes around the particles causing long white trails across the sky.”

http://www.gispri.or.jp/symp/pdf/ipccsym/sraa.pdf
“Sulfur and soot particles emitted by aircraft, along with water vapor, trigger the formation of line-shaped white clouds called condensation trails, or contrails. Contrails have a positive radiative forcing and add to warming. These emissions may also induce greater cirrus cloud cover, which would increase warming as well. But this process is poorly understood and it is not yet clear how much, if at all, aircraft emissions increase cirrus cloudiness.”

http://aero-net.info/fileadmin/aeronet_files/links/documents/DLR/Schumann_Contrails.pdf
“Particles emitted from the aircraft change the concentration of particles in the atmospheric aerosol that influence cirrus formation over the whole life-time of the particles formed.”

ftp://ftp.rta.nato.int/PubFullText/RTO/EN/RTO-EN-AVT-150/EN-AVT-150-15.pdf
“During the accumulation of soot particles in the troposphere owing to an increase in fuel consumption by aviation, the region covered with contrails is also increased.”

 

Note that I never see him post any scientific evidence to back up his statement. That is something weird from someone who has website with the name of contrailscience. The explanation for contrails in his website is like this, very different from the explanation of contrails in the previous scientific reference:

Contrails Are Condensation, But Not Like Your Breath


“When you breath out on a cold day, you see a little cloud of condensation form from your breath. This is the same kind of thing, your damp warm lungs add moisture to the air, and when you breath out, you get condensation.

But the condensation from your breath quickly evaporates, usually in less than a second. Condensation trails from a jet can last for many minutes, even for hours sometimes. So why is there this difference? Why do jet contrails sometime persist, but your breath condensation quickly evaporates?

The difference is because a contrail freezes.”

 

His explanation at his forum about contrails:
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/factual-errors-in-why-in-the-world-are-they-spraying.712/#post-18298
“In contrail formation that starts out as condensed water (which almost instantly freezes, and then starts to accrete).”

His post actually include link from scientific reference, but the explanation differ:
http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/policy_guidance/envir_policy/media/contrails.pdf
“If sufficient humidity occurs in the exhaust plume, water condenses on particles to form liquid droplets.”

Note that the word is “condenses on”, not “condenses into”. So, the particles play a role as something that the water moisture cling on to.

 

He claimed that all the articles in contrailscience are his thoughts:

He provided link to a new article  dated of July 31st, 2012.

Unlike the article with similar theme from TheTruthDenied, his article states there is no good reason to do contrails avoidance.

Our point is clear, that unless people do something, trails will become serious problem if it is not already a serious problem.

The reason I mentioned his article is because of this quote bellow:
“Contrails also require condensation nuclei. Often this comes from soot and sulphur and other byproducts in the engine exhaust.”

He denied my statement about “My reference mentions that aerosols are required.”, when a few days before he wrote on his website: “Contrails also require condensation nuclei”.

Edit:
The sentence are then edited. Note that I made the article reading the first version of his web page.

this link is an archive of August 29th, 2012 where the sentence still was not changed.

Here is the archive link for september 20th, 2012 where the sentence changed into:
“Contrails also generally require condensation nuclei.”

The word generally was added.

 

 

Then he give me a  graph for reference:

Which is:

I then posted a different graph with the same topic:

His response:
“My graph came from your link. It seems pretty similar to the second one you posted, but with an additional set of estimates.”

Screenshot:

The graph posted by Mick West is  supposed to be similar the red bar on the graph posted by me. However, note his graph shows contrails have a lower warming property than CO2, when mine shows almost the same thing. Then another chemtrails debunker also posted a graph on David Icke’s  forum, similar to the one posted by Mick West.

I consider this proof of manipulated data, not by Mick West, but by something else in a bigger scale. This is an obvious game going on , and I thought the public should be aware.

 

Edit:
I note that some people agree with the post bellow, posted by Mick West:
“But there’s lots of aerosols in the atmosphere anyway, that’s how natural clouds form.
Contrails would form even if there were no soot in the exhaust. The main thing is the water in the exhaust.”

While it may look make sense, logical, etc; There is problem with that statement: no evidence.

That statement was not backed up by scientific evidence, and probably never. Here is reference from scientific document, denying the first statement:
http://www.icas.org/ICAS_ARCHIVE_CD1998-2010/ICAS2006/PAPERS/136.PDF
“(1). Cirrus clouds can evolve from spreading persistent contrails known as primary cirrus or contrail cirrus (2). Secondary cirrus occur due to locally increased soot and aerosol concentration, which might lead to the formation of cirrus clouds that would not form in the absence of air traffic.”

Clouds made by plane aerosol is different from natural clouds.

Then for the second statement:
http://science-edu.larc.nasa.gov/contrail-edu/science.html
“Contrails are clouds formed when water vapor condenses and freezes around small particles (aerosols) that exist in aircraft exhaust. Some of that water vapor comes from the air around the plane; and, some is added by the exhaust of the aircraft.”

The main thing of contrails is not the water, but the aerosol or particle production. I could not find statement in scientific reference that support the idea of contrails can form with only water vapor.

The strange things is, many people (even among chemtrails believer) consider Mick West assumption as facts, even without evidence, and deny the real fact.

 

Edit:
Recently I came accross clouds information for kids from thecontrails.com. There is two different definition of contrails origin.

From NASA:
http://science-edu.larc.nasa.gov/SCOOL/pdf/Kiwi_Kids_Cloud_Guide.pdf
“Contrails are formed when particles from aircraft jet engines mix with the water vapour in the air. The water vapour condenses and freezes around the particles causing long white trails across the sky.”

From Weather Wiz Kids:
http://www.weatherwizkids.com/weather-clouds.htm
“Contrails are condensation trails left behind jet aircrafts. Contrails form when hot humid air from jet exhaust mixes with environmental air of low vapor pressure and low temperature. The mixing is a result of turbulence generated by the engine exhaust.”

 

We see different source of contrails. The first link mention that contrails are from particles, the second link are from hot humid air. Only one of them is correct. Chemtrails debunker like Mick West deny the first link and agree with the second link.

Different crucial explanation of the same thing indicate disinformation. The difference is crucial because it change the logic. Anyone believe in the second link would think that to create trails on unfavorable condition would require more water. While anyone who believe in the first link would think that to create trails on unfavorable condition would require more particles which is originally very very small in percentage.

This link bellow indicate that 5500ppm (0.55%) is enough to produce more trails:
A collection of papers presented at the 14th International Conference on Nucleation and Atmospheric Aerosols, Helsinki, 26 – 30 August 1996.

Based on the above link, spraying chemtrails do not need supertanker.

 

Edit:
It seems Mick West still do not learn his lesson. He kept spewing baseless logic.
The article of Dec 13th, 2012:
“But the condensation from your breath quickly evaporates, usually in less than a second. Condensation trails from a jet can last for many minutes, even for hours sometimes. So why is there this difference? Why do jet contrails sometime persist, but your breath condensation quickly evaporates?

The difference is because a contrail freezes.”

The real reason for why the contrails persist is because contrails have nuclei. The nuclei make the water vapor stick together. Without the nuclei, the trails may not form at all:
Contrails: What’s Left Behind Is Bad News, By Nick Onkow, March 4, 2006
There are several methods that can be explored that will help reduce the role that contrails play in global warming. The easiest way to avoid this global warming through contrail cirrus clouds is to have jets fly at different altitudes. Flying higher than the typical 30,000 to 40,000 feet would usually stop contrails from forming, as would flying lower. another option might be to increase the emission standards of jet engines and with that only insure airplanes with the newer, cleaner engines. Tests were performed with a NASA jet aircraft examining the effect of sulfur levels in jet fuel exhaust. During the airborne test one engine was run on normal jet fuel and the other engine was run on fuel that emitted exhaust with a lower sulfur content. The high sulfur engine, representing most jet engines on modern commercial aircraft, produced a contrail that lasted through a larger range of temperatures and formed faster out of the engine. The low sulfur engine did the opposite. This condensation nuclei is the tiny matter that gives water vapor the ability to form. The International Civil Aviation Organization is in favor of making polluting, obsolete aircraft uninsurable. While this option would not completely eliminate contrails, it would narrow the window of conditions needed to form them, making them less common.”

 

In that experiment, sulfur is a very important factor for contrails life and visibility. Chemtrails debunker often claimed that banning contrails is impossible because air travel is neccesary, the article explained that contrails can be avoided without banning air travel.

Since chemtrails are also trail, if government ban contrails, then chemtrails will also be banned.

 

The Truth Denied

staff writer

Please follow and like us:
error172466
fb-share-icon1976339647
Tweet 702k
fb-share-icon12005