Are Chemtrails or Weather Modification Flights Real?
Why Are States Banning Geoengineering and Weather Modification Flights?
In recent months, millions of people across the world have complained of odd-looking unnatural checkered-patterned streaks of plumes or traces sprayed into the skies, spreading slowly into hazy gray-looking artificial cloud covers (that look like a grayish or silver mist) that block sunshine. Many people believe these plumes are harmful and call them chemtrails. Some scientists call them by names like radiation geoengineering (or solar radiation management, SRM, designed to control ground temperatures and/or precipitations). But mainstream folks and news media call them just regular contrails (condensates from jet fuel vapors).
Recently, when a Florida Congressman complained about these patterns, many of his political opponents called him crazy and a conspiracy theorist because he is calling contrails as chemtrails! (read farther to see the difference).
But the Florida Congressman, like many others in different state legislatures that have banned weather engineering flights, is not hallucinating or making things up. Tennessee has fully enacted laws banning stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) and other large-scale geoengineering, while Florida just passed legislation in 2025 to designate geoengineering and weather modification activities as a third-degree felony, punishable by up to five years imprisonment and fines of up to $100,000. Several other states, including Arizona, Pennsylvania, Montana, and South Carolina, have seen similar bills introduced that have not become laws yet. In Pennsylvania for example, Senate Bill 508, seeks to ban polluting geoengineering practices like cloud seeding and solar radiation modification. Known as the Clean Air Preservation Act, it tasks the State Police and sheriffs with issuing cease-and-desist orders and authorizes felony charges for violations, with fines of at least $500,000 and two years’ imprisonment.
But it is not the states but the Federal Government that seem to be behind the sprayed aerosolized chemicals condensates (the so-called chemtrails). Recently, Health and Human Services Secretary confirmed what people call chemtrails are part of Department of Defense (or Department of War, as Trump renamed it) DARPA projects, which is beyond his authority to control or divulge but he promised “We will do everything we can to stop it!”
In 2022, The White House confirmed that it was conducting a five-year research project to study ways of modifying the amount of sunlight that reaches the earth to temper the effects of global warming, a process sometimes called solar geoengineering or sunlight reflection. Technologies tested include stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI), marine cloud brightening and cirrus cloud thinning. Critics of the White House project indicated that many of the weather modification techniques, such as spraying sulfur dioxide into the atmosphere, are known to have harmful effects on the environment and human health.
In 2013, International Business Times reported that the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) was bankrolling a somewhat clandestine project titled “Geoengineering Climate: Technical Evaluation and Discussion of Impacts,” co-funded by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to explore ways to reverse global warming by controlling the weather. The techniques considered were solar radiation management, SRM (that could include spraying reflective aerosol particles into the skies), and carbon dioxide removal, CDR, techniques. A previous government experiment, the High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP), designed to study EMF reflectivity of the ionosphere, is believed by many libertarian government critics to be a way to modify weather, cause natural disasters or cause power outages in different parts of the planet.
People who deny Chemtrails or Weather modification aerosol sprays exist, call those streaks or trails in the skies “Contrails” (condensed vapor from exhaust of airplanes). But the condensates from “chemical aerosols” injected by weather modification flights (so-called Chemtrails) are not the same as regular jet fuel vapor condensates from commercial flights (Contrails). Contrails and Chemtrails are different, as explained in depth by Dane Wigington, a scientist/engineer who has spent most of his life researching and documenting this topic and has compiled thousands of documents on geoengineeringwatch.org. Even people who dismiss his libertarian views (against kleptocrats, big government interference and government-corporate collusion), do not dispute his veracity and accuracy about the harms associated with weather modification chemical aerosols which are real and different from normal contrails (see poster above made by his Watchdog group).
Independent Journalist Sharyl Attkisson has recently interviewed Leah Wilson who leads Stand for Health Freedom, a nonprofit pushing for transparency on weather control programs such as secret military programs and geo-engineering startups.
In our own area, We have also seen side by side trails from flying aircraft within the same time frame over our head, some trails are indeed short in length and duration (contrails and regular jet fuel vapor condensates) and others last for hours and spread into thin patterned reflective layers (chemtrail clouds) that block sunlight or make the skies dirty (see image above). Why would some commercial flights have short trails and others flying through identical weather patterns have longer lasting spreading trails?
We have also occasionally observed, as captured in the image below, a black streak (continuation of the white streak towards the left) preceding the sprayed aerosol condensates. Normal commercial flights do not have a black streak preceding them! This plane is flying from right to left.
Weather modification through the use of various chemicals and electrical processes has been occurring for a while, since at least the 1960s. Wallace Howell was an early leader of the idea, which assumes (mistakenly) that humans can control nature in its full (large) scale better than nature itself!
Born in 1912, by the 1950s and 60s Wallace had worked with the U.S. Weather Bureau and the US military, consulted with the U.S. government on weather modification and led the Harvard-Mount Washington Icing Research Project. By the 1960s, his company, W. E. Howell Associates, focused on weather modification had worked on more than sixty weather-related projects around the world, seeking to transform weather into a commodity, and of course a lot of profit for his company to control this globally essential commodity!
Wallace’s services were hired by the Blue Ridge Weather Modification Association (BRWMA), which consisted mainly of wealthy, large scale fruit growers in south-central Pennsylvania, as well as West Virginia, Maryland, and Virginia, who were seeking higher profits and relief (from unreliable weather).
Wallace’s weather modification activities, including Silver Iodide spraying and energizing with huge electrical generators, continued into the mid 60s. However, local farmers and citizens believed that Wallace’s activities were damaging and upsetting the balance of nature. A group of several hundred farmers and citizens created the Pennsylvania Natural Weather Association, and formed a lawsuit against the BRWMA and Wallace himself. According to the many eyewitness reports by these citizens who lived most of their lives in Fulton County PA since the early 1900s, the changes in the climate after Wallace’s weather control projects were drastic and harmful to farmers because they created unpredictable imbalances. You can read more about the interesting history of weather modification in Pennsylvania here in this link.
Today, weather modification and control projects are more active than ever. Governments in the world now try to divert or form clouds over their land to deprive neighboring countries of much-needed precipitation. Countries are now using weather modification as a weapon against each other. Since 2018, Iran, which is facing crippling and unprecedented drought, has accused countries like Turkey and Israel of using “weather weapons” or cloud seeding to block rain clouds headed to Iranian airspace. Many countries in the Middle East are developing cloud seeding and weather modification technologies.
Discussing pros and cons of various weather engineering technologies is beyond the scope of this article. Yet, we know that many of the ingredients sprayed in aerosols or in jet fuels are harmful to humans and soil/agricultural systems. Although some states are trying to ban these flights, the U.S. government can bypass state laws by citing national security or urgent climate mitigation mandates, and spray as often as it desires, without seeking any permission from residents impacted on the ground by precipitating debris and suffocated sunlight.
Scientists are now warning that SAI’s systemic stressors, and risks of systemic cascades and synchronous failures, are highly understudied:
Injecting particles into atmosphere to reflect sunlight, stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI), represents a potential technological solution to the threat of climate change. But could the cure be worse than the disease? … AI could contribute to systemic risk by introducing stressors into critical systems such as agriculture. SAI's systemic stressors, and risks of systemic cascades and synchronous failures, are highly understudied. SAI deployment more tightly couples different ecological, economic, and political systems. This creates a precarious condition of latent risk, the largest cause for concern. Thicker SAI masking extreme warming could create a planetary Sword of Damocles. That is, if SAI were removed but underlying greenhouse gas concentrations not reduced, there would be extreme warming in a very short timeframe. Sufficiently large global shocks could force SAI termination and trigger SAI's latent risk, compounding disasters and catastrophic risks. Across all these dimensions, the specific SAI deployment, and associated governance, is critical. A well-coordinated use of a small amount of SAI would incur negligible risks, but this is an optimistic scenario. Conversely, larger use of SAI used in an uncoordinated manner poses many potential dangers.
The SAI projects and the “global warming” theories that support it are on par with the Russian efforts when Lysenkoism reigned. The thermal energy requirement for solar activity to be responsible for global warming do not make sense. The ECDO theory does present evidence of sufficient energy being present to warm the oceans and eventually our atmosphere.