Here's how I identify and document spray planes.


Canon 20D with Canon 75-300MM lens--8 megapixel 2/3 full frame sensor, time
set to Zeit clock
Sony DSC-W7, time set to Zeit clock
Leupold 10x42 binoculars
Flip Ultra HD video camera, time set to Zeit clock
The Canon and Sony cameras timestamp their photos in the EXIF data and the
file, the FLIP video doesn't timestamp the file and I haven't opened the
video in a video editing program to see if it's timestamped anywhere else.
Zeit radio controlled clock-accurate to 1 second
Sony VAIO desktop computer, computer clock set to Zeit


Canon EOS Viewer Utility to convert raw files to tif and jpg
Adobe Photoshop CS
Paint Shop Pro 5
Flight Aware
Flight Explorer Personal Edition


I can see planes flying out of LAX as they cross the Nevada/California
border by looking south west from my front door. When a plane starts
chemtrailing I start shooting with the Sony camera to document the spraying.
When the plane gets closer I start shooting with the Canon and I can usually
get a very good shot of the plane as it overfly my house. Once the plane is
over my house I go inside and sit down in front of my computer that has
Flight Explorer showing the planes in the Las Vegas airspace. I use the
FLIP video to shoot my Zeit clock and then the computer screen as I right
click the airplane symbols to display their properties.

Hours later after I'm done shooting all the planes I use the EOS viewer
utility to process the raw images to tifs and use Photoshop to expand the
image to 100%. The Sony images are shot in jpg and copied from the memory
stick to a folder on my computer. Looking at the Canon images I can see the
planes paint scheme and can identify the type of plane. For example, the
Virgin airplane that chemtrails in the morning is Virgin flight 404 or
VRD404. It has a distinctive paint scheme of a white underbody with red
tail and red engines. Flight 404 uses an Airbus A320 airplane. I identified
this plane by using the FLIP software to run the video of Flight Explorer.
I look for the Zeit clock time similar to the timestamp on the Canon and
Sony images. Running the video shows all the planes in the Las Vegas air
space and sometimes it's easy to determine which plane matches the still
photos and other times it's very hard since I don't yet have a full plane
paint scheme database to refer to. One of the planes that was very hard to
identify was the AirTran TRS890 flight with aqua underbody and blue engines
because AirTran isn't a major carrier.

There is one flaw in my technique that would make it hard to assert that the
plane I'm photographing is the one that is chemtrailing. And that is I know
the Sony images and the Canon images are of the same plane but I couldn't
prove it simply based on the images I shot. I have to have video evidence
of the chemtrailing plane that I can match up with the still photographs.
the next time I go out to shoot I'll use my flip video to video the process
and that should take care of that aspect.

One of the things we have to be concerned about as we document aspects of
the chemtrail spraying is that our evidence must be of the highest quality
and irrefutable. Otherwise our conclusions can be questioned and our
credibility can be destroyed. This is why I'm trying to have the highest
standards in my work and I hope others would follow my example. For
example, I am very disturbed by the recent articles written by Dr Ilya
Sandra Perlingieri. The science behind the collection of the air samples is
very weak and nowhere is the "maximum contaminant level" defined. I emailed
Bridget Conroy asking how the "maximum contaminant level" was determined but
I haven't gotten any reply. This is from the Arizona Sky Watch web site and
I don't think it would hold up very well to scientific scrutiny.

We also took air samples in Phoenix, on non-windy days, using a HEPA filter,
then vacuuming the particulates from that filter into another pristine HEPA
filter, which we then emptied into a sterile container. We were amazed at
the huge accumulations of the same chemtrail metals noted above. We feel it
is reasonable to designate the "Maximum Contaminant Level", or toxic limit,
of these materials in the air particulates to also be twice that for surface
water. Again, this is due to the absence of any realistic air particulate
standards that would account for the health effects of these materials in
the air we breathe every day.