104 replies to this topic

[Mike K.]

Pictures from back in the day? Please do!

Were 737-200s through 500s that we had in the 90s different jet engine technology in terms of how emissions left their mark in the sky, than the tech of today’s jet engines in airliners?

[LJ]

I don’t remember the skies getting hazy as a kid, after planes flew by. Now it seems like the contrails spread out over vast distances and just stay there.

Maybe jet propulsion has changed and the effect is contrails that spread out differently than before. Maybe the fuels we use today create a different visible emission.

 

When you were a kid the airplanes were propeller driven and they don't produce contrails.

The contrails hang in the sky if the air aloft is non-turbulent, the more turbulent (windy) the air aloft is the faster the contrails dissipate.

 

As soon as somebody tells me they believe in chemtrails I immediately discount anything else they tell me.

[Mike K.]

When you were a kid the airplanes were propeller driven and they don't produce contrails.

I was a kid in the 90s. Definitely deep into the non-prop jet age by then.

[dasmo]

There’s some bits in here on what I was talking about.

persistent contrails are of interest to scientists because they increase the cloudiness of the atmosphere. The increase happens in two ways. First, persistent contrails
are line-shaped clouds that would not have formed in the atmosphere without the passage of an aircraft. Secondly, persistent contrails often evolve and spread into extensive cirrus cloud cover that is indistinguishable from naturally occurring cloudiness. At present, it is unknown how much of this more extensive cloudiness would have occurred without the passage of an aircraft. Not enough is known about how natural clouds form in the atmosphere to answer this question.

https://www.faa.gov/...y/contrails.pdf

[dasmo]

So it doesn’t need to be chemicals. Although the FAA here also recognizes that certain chemicals and impurities in the fuel might add to it. However, it’s primarily cause is water vapour resulting from the modern turbofan engine design. Which makes sense because clouds are water after all.

The issue is they are ugly and create lasting clouds and thus affect the weather.

[Mike K.]

See, it’s a thing. The contrails are definitely different today than in the past. This is from the EU Commission, where the following question was asked:

1. Is the Commission aware that, 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 and which remain visible for 20 minutes at most and can only be produced if steam condenses on dust particles due to low temperatures and high humidity?

- https://www.europarl...07-2455_EN.html

There absolutely is something either different about the fuels, or the technology, or both, to cause the effect observed 20 years ago and discussed above, and which we see today.

[m3m]

And the answer given:

1. The Commission is aware of claims that such trends and phenomena exist. However, the Commission is not aware of any evidence substantiating such claims. The extent to which aircraft condensation trails form and the speed at which they disappear are in the first instance determined by pressure, temperature, and the relative humidity of a given flight level. Fuel and combustion properties and the overall propulsive efficiency may also have an impact. Any changes or trends in the extent to which contrails are reported to remain visible and develop into more widespread clouds may thus be due to factors such as changes in:

— meteorological conditions;
— traffic volumes;
— jet-engine efficiency.

[m3m]

Just because a question is asked doesn’t mean there’s merit to the underlying idea

[Victoria Watcher]

More and more jets have the high bypass engines now. That might make them more severe.

[m3m]

There’s also just more jets flying

[Victoria Watcher]

AI:


Engine efficiency and contrail formation: Higher engine efficiency means that contrails can form at higher altitudes and colder temperatures than with less efficient engines.
Higher bypass ratios: High bypass engines are designed to be more fuel-efficient, accelerating a larger mass of air to a lower velocity, which leads to a cooler exhaust plume compared to the core engine exhaust.
Contrail threshold: Contrail formation depends on the temperature and humidity of the ambient air. Modern, efficient engines are better at creating conditions for contrail formation over a broader range of altitudes than older engines.

[m3m]

does any of this have to do with the controversy around Tucker hosting Nick Fuentes for a casual discussion on Jewish conspiracy theories ?

[Victoria Watcher]

There should be no controversy. Guy can talk to whoever he wants to.

If he wants to go all Art Bell, there is an appetite and audience for that.

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 11 November 2025 - 12:55 PM.

[dasmo]

More and more jets have the high bypass engines now. That might make them more severe.

This is what I concluded. And they are most definitely more and more irritating. As the FAA pointed they are sticky, and form into cloud cover. 

This was a pic I took in the Netherlands about five years ago when I got up and opened the curtains. Haha. When we flew within the EU it was crazy to see it from the sky. Like a grid carpet. Awful. Again, I think the chemtrail thing is a red herring. In the case of Tucker, he is an entertainer now in this particular genre. Like Alex Jones but less over the top. More earthy. 

[Mike K.]

Yes, these are vastly different than the contrails of the 90s.

This is very likely a technology change, but you’d think science would have a simple, easy to understand answer why there is this difference.

[dasmo]

Could get AI to summarize this report. The 1999 IPCC report, "Aviation and the Global Atmosphere,"

https://archive.ipcc...index.php?idp=0

[Victoria Watcher]

[Mike K.]

What the heck!?

This is the Orthodox Church video: https://youtu.be/KmI...bNXdqVCxuEHXrnP

[Victoria Watcher]

Tucker Carlson is Launching His Own Precious Metals Company

Carlson is expanding his empire.

https://gizmodo.com/...pany-2000690962

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 25 November 2025 - 11:54 AM.

[m3m]

I was expecting mining operations or something similar. But it’s just a scammy gold re-seller. TBH, it’s probably not a bad business model for Tucker:

1- scare his audience into thinking that the economy is going to collapse

2- tell his audience that gold is the only way to safely keep your savings

3- advertise your own gold company heavily

4- offer consulting (and charge fees) to direct gullible investors to purchase gold with high mark ups

5- charge the purchasers to set up an IRA

6- charge the purchasers annual storage in their “ultra secure bunker” and annual admin fees

7- charge fees when customers withdraw or move their holdings

8- offer to purchase customer’s gold holdings with a price below spot price

Repeat