Here, Don...a photo from your authoritative site:

Chemtrail with break in it

In talking about the above photo, the article at the URL below says:

"He posits that the breaks are caused by jets having "simply passed through a pocket of air where contrails" - carefully, he doesn,t refer to them as "chemtrails"! - "will not form. The air could be too warm or too dry to form the ice crystals which make a contrail visible."

It is eminently unlikely, if not patently impossible, that air that high up would be so warm, to begin with. The jets that form chemtrails typically fly at at least three miles high. Even if it was too warm, a trail, of sorts, of water vapor would be likely, following the jet. And, even if the air were very dry, a trace of the ice crystals from the jet engines, that supposedly form the "seed" for the chemtrail, should be visible, and it is not.

And that is leaving aside, entirely, the fact that there is little reason to believe that an isolated, tiny, patch of air could be so radically different from the overwhelming mass of air around it! If an area of warm or dry air were to intrude, it is likely that it would be no time before the rest of the air around it would bring it into equilibrium.

More than that, though, Mr. Ernst, will have to explain how it is possible for chemtrails with breaks, supposedly caused by differing air masses, to occur in close proximity to chemtrails with no breaks!
"I'll leave it at that and let you be the judge", he concludes archly.

If he's telling the absolute, incontrovertible truth, which he pretends to be, then he would be able to call it that! He wouldn't have to leave it to the reader to "be the judge".

That, in itself, all but brands the material on the Seawana site utterly untrustworthy...."

Chemtrails discussion