posted 04-03-2002 01:55 PM            

i have seen this term or similar term used several times on this board.

what is the difference between a chemtrail and a persistent contrail? i am not flaming, i just am trying to get a handle on what people are seeing. if one see's a very persistent trail, how do you determine if its con- or chem-?

posted 04-03-2002 02:32 PM            

what i was trying to get at though is how people come to their conclusions. you used flight tracking software and atmospheric readings to make your conclusions. while i may disagree with some of your findings, at least you examined things scientifically before drawing conclusions.

what i was addressing was how people who are not using flight explorer and other tools come to their conclusions. many here look up and see an "unusually persistent trail" and make a conclusion solely on what their eyes are telling them. so i conclude that they are seeing something that i am not.

so i ask them; when you see a persistent trail how do you know if its con- of chem- by just looking at it.

thremit, i believe that you have agreed with some of the pilots and scientist here and i believe that even your report demonstrates that persistence alone is not the smoking gun. (if i am wrong, please correct me)

posted 04-03-2002 07:10 PM            

deborah,
i just checked out the picture in the link that you provided. there are two major high altitude VOR's in your area. there are several "jet airways" (high altitude) the use these VOR's: J4, J20, J101, J29, J180.

there is alot if high altitude traffic, maybe even me, crossing overhead this area. this may explain the "zig-zagging" trails in your photo.

hope this is of use