Persistent Chemtales

Filmmaker Sean Hibbeler reminds us seeing is believing, but evidence is knowing.

Climate Trails, Sean Hibbeler’s new documentary streaming now on Amazon Prime and Vimeo, makes a good argument that geoengineering and weather modification experiments are more prevalent than most of us realize, and that it would behoove us to learn how our health is affected by planes spraying chemicals into the atmosphere. But the film fails to prove the “stripes” that frequently appear in the sky aren’t just normal contrails that can linger depending on atmospheric conditions and altitude.

Information on Contrails from Aircraft - U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) website

Throughout his two-hour visit with us last week, Sean repeatedly insisted that footage of long clouds forming behind aircraft is evidence that chemicals are regularly sprayed in plain view. But showing it doesn’t establish what causes it. Nothing in Climate Trails connects the dots between condensation that sticks around for a while before dissipating, and geoengineering or weather modification.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) website states: “Contrails, or ‘condensation trails’—the line-shaped clouds often seen behind aircraft—are ice crystal clouds formed by the combination of carbon particles and water vapor emitted from the combustion of aviation fuel and atmospheric water vapor. They typically occur at about the same altitutdes as natural cirrus clouds, approximately 25,000 to 35,000 feet. Depending on the temperature and the amount of moisture in the air at this altitude, contrails either evaporate quickly or persist. If the humidity is low and the temperature is not cold enough (above -40 degrees Fahrenheit) contrails will dissipate quickly. However, if the air is moist and the temperature is -40°F or below, then a contrail will ‘persist’ for as long as 30 minutes to an hour.”

One way Sean and his ilk could possibly rebut the government and win over the public, would be to produce evidence of “chemtrails” materializing in conditions other than what the NOAA says is a prerequisite for their existence. If they were to document, for example, the temperature at an altitude of 30,000 feet was well above above -40 degrees Fahrenheit, but ”chemtrails” were nonetheless visible, they could debunk the government’s story. When I asked Sean if any of his fellow proponents have compiled that sort of data, he accused me of “not looking for proof,” as if I were ignoring low-hanging fruit. “There’s tons of videos,” he told me. “And what you’ll see in the sky, Jeff, is a normal airplane producing a contrail, and...on the side of it, there’s a jet spraying ‘chemtrails.’ Why wouldn’t both jets be producing the same trail?” Sean reiterated “there are thousands of videos on social media” that validate his argument, but he left us wondering why he couldn’t get permission to use any of it in his film.

When asked why he conducted no interviews with aviation professionals who would be regularly witnessing “chemtrails” if they were really being emitted as he claims, Sean told us they all sign non-disclosure agreements (NDAs). That’s probably true for employees of weather modification companies, but the question was about people who work for regular commercial airlines and who see up close every day what’s going on with planes on the ground and in the skies. Why didn’t he interview anyone in that category, such as pilots, flight attendants, air traffic controllers or mechanics? “I just can’t get a hold of anyone that I needed to, to show these things,” he bemoaned. “I’ve tried to contact people. If they don’t reply, they don’t reply.”

Finally, I asked Sean if he thinks the average airline pilot “knows” that the long condensation trails emanating from planes on some days, are “chemtrails.” He replied unequivocally, “I would say yes.” That’s a very large pool of eyewitnesses and potential whistleblowers, and it’s even larger if we include flight attendants, mechanics and air traffic controllers. But for whatever reason, none of them want to talk to Sean, even though many are kindred spirits, and some, we are told, have already spilled the beans.

On the next episode (Nov. 20) of The Winers, our special guest will be meteorologist Chris Martz, who testified in September before the United States House of Representatives Subcommittee on Delivering on Government Efficiency (DOGE) for the hearing, “Playing God with the Weather – A Disastrous Forecast,” chaired by Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R–GA-14). The topic of the hearing was weather modification and geoengineering. Chris testified that “trying to manipulate the weather, even on localized scales, can have unintended downstream consequences,” and “solar geoengineering...is ethically preposterous.” So regarding those two issues, Chris’s analysis is in alignment with what Sean Hibbeler puts forth in Climate Trails. But Chris also testified: “There are no compelling lines of evidence that aircraft condensation trails are deliberately created to alter weather patterns or ‘block out’ solar radiation.” It almost seems as if that’s the real reason Sean couldn’t find any credible experts to corroborate the premise of his film. (It couldn’t be!)

Ivana Nikolić Hughes, a chemistry scientist who teaches at Columbia University and serves as president of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, will also join us Thursday night to discuss the need for nuclear arms reduction. It’s all about the atmosphere, baby!