Tennessee Lawmakers Propose Legislation Banning ‘Chemtrails’


On Monday, the Tennessee Senate passed a bill prohibiting “the intentional injection, release, or dispersion, by any means, of chemicals, chemical compounds, substances, or apparatus within the borders of this state into the atmosphere with the express purpose of affecting temperature, weather, or the intensity of the sunlight …” In other words, the bill would make it against the law to dispense “chemtrails” over Tennessee.

SB 2691/HB 2063, sponsored by Rep. Monty Fritts, R-Kingston, and Sen. Steve Southerland, R-Morristown, has yet to move on for consideration by the House. Whether it will pass to become law is unclear. The House was set to review the legislation yesterday. No word yet on any conclusions.

According to language in the Senate bill, there is “documentation” that “the federal government or other entities acting on the federal government’s behalf or at the federal government’s request may conduct geoengineering experiments by intentionally dispersing chemicals into the atmosphere, and those activities may occur within the State of Tennessee.”

The source of the documentation is not clear. In contrast, a research group at Harvard University published a report that includes the category heading, “There is no evidence for the existence of chemtrails.” The report continues: “If there really were a large-scale program dumping material from aircraft at the scale described, there would have to be a large operating program to manufacture, load and disperse materials. If such a program existed at the scale required to explain the claimed amount of chemtrails, it would require thousands or perhaps tens of thousands of people. It would be extraordinarily hard to keep such a program secret because it would be so easy for a single individual in the program to reveal it using leaked documents, photographs or actual hardware.”

Mark Phelps
Mark Phelps is a senior editor at AVweb. He is an instrument rated private pilot and former owner of a Grumman American AA1B and a V-tail Bonanza.


  1. In the grand theater of politics, where science often plays the understudy to spectacle, some LOWER-BASE POLITICIANS seem to be auditioning for the lead role in “Attack of the Chemtrails!” Ignoring the chorus of scientific consensus, they’re wooing a select audience by drafting laws against these mythical threats. Perhaps aiming for a standing ovation from the anti-establishment seats, they champion individual liberties against the phantom menace with a zeal that’d make a coonhound on a raccoon’s trail look lackadaisical. The plot thickens, but will the critics rave or pan their performance? Bless their hearts, only time will tell.

  2. Shhh – don’t let them know that chemtrails are mostly dihydrogen monoxide or else they’ll ban that, too!

  3. One would be aghast at the flood of stupid bills proposed every day in our fifty state legislatures. With a few notable exceptions (looking at you Alabama and Texas, but you’ve got plenty of company) enough thoughtful legislators will manage to torpedo the most egregious bills (out of sheer embarrassment, if nothing else) and they’ll never get to a governor’s desk. I suspect that someone will take this bill’s sponsors aside, gently explain a little bit of atmospheric science and federal pre-emption (at a third-grade level), administer well-deserved dope-slaps, and quash the bill.

    These weren’t the same idiots that wanted to sue Canada for all their wildfire smoke we got last year, are they?

  4. Reading the headline:
    “Lawmakers Propose Legislation Banning Chemtrails”
    In the words of Les Nessman at the turkey drop “as God is my witness” I reflexively glanced down at the date on my computer screen to see if it was April 1 already.

    • Squared. A NUTTY subject to be addressed when SO many pressing problems are being ignored 🙁
      Obviously, some lobbyist got to these dudes?

  5. Generally, geoengineering measures that aim to shield the earth from sunlight are currently viewed as an emergency solution to avoid exceeding the Paris accord’s 1.5 degree C limit, and roundly criticized by the climate community.
    Ironically, this could be an issue that unites the clown show who believes that chemtrails exist and also don’t give a rat’s patoot about the environment, and those of us who actually care about global climate change.

    • Except that it applies to operations emitting chemicals “with the express purpose of affecting temperature, weather, or the intensity of the sunlight …”

      The purpose of the power plant is to make power; the purpose of the coal-rolling pickup is to annoy. Neither would be affected.

        • It’s the bright clothing they wear; it reflects the sun away from the planet.

          Note that the tinfoil hat crowd helps out as well.

  6. Unlike the majority of readers I took the opportunity to read this bill to include SA0653 and the Fiscal Memorandum. Nowhere in this bill or amendment 1 does it mention chemtrails. The bill is an environmental bill that added air quality protection.

    • True. But the language used in Amendment 1 of SB2691 and the Fiscal Memo could easily fit the dictionary definition of ‘chemtrails’. Since the term ‘chemtrails’ is a conspiracy theorist born word, it wouldn’t be good optics for a state political body to actually use it in the verbiage of legislation.

    • Best I can see in the bill is that it bans crazies from wanting to introduce weather modifications associated with their “the global warming crisis” agenda.

  7. Unfortunately, the link to the bill is geolocation blocked for me in the UK. I was able to read “The Tennessean” report and fact-check. According to that site, the bill posits the existence of chemtrails, which of course are a fiction.

    • I don’t believe that any Federal preemption of airspace applies to environmental laws.

      They are not seeking to regulate where or when planes may fly; they are seeking to ban “the intentional injection, release, or dispersion, by any means, of chemicals, chemical compounds, […] with the express purpose of affecting temperature…”

      [Note the “express purpose” clause. As presented, this would not affect the leaded avgas controversy.]

  8. Once the Bill is passed, then “they” will define “Chemtrails” as whatever they don’t like. I truthfully would expect more from a political wing claiming to be “conservative”.

  9. Uh oh. The jig is up. I worried my whole career that we’d be caught and now it appears the day of reckoning is nigh. Hopefully, the fact that I’m now retired may assuage the authorities.

    The whole program was a bust, however. It was replaced by Bill Gates’ and George Soros’ brain chip administered through vaccines.

  10. I’m ashamed to say I live in Tennessee and saw the other day where these Bozos presented this bill. It’s about them showing to their loony constituents, “Look what I’ve done. And I’m headlines in the newspaper and TV now.” As with most, it is all about them being recognized and standing out. And yes, don’t guess anyone explain to them that the State doesn’t own or regulate airspace above it.

    • No, that was Indiana, back in 1897, and the bill actually addressed the problem of “squaring the circle”. The bill stemmed from the work of a country doctor named Goodwin who was a decidely ametuer mathmatician. His solution required redefining pi as 3.2, or 4, or your choice of up to four other values along the way.

      The bill was unanimously passed by the House but quickly died in the Senate.

      Of more recent note was an April Fool’s ‘news release’ from 1998 which claimed that Alabama was passing a law setting pi = 3. As detailed by snopes.com:

      “Written by Mark Boslough as an April Fool’s parody on legislative and school board attacks on evolution in New Mexico, the author took real statements from New Mexican legislators and school board members supporting creationism and recast them into a fictional account detailing how Alabama legislators had passed a law calling for the value of pi to be set to the “Biblical value” of 3.0.”


  11. Are we confusing Chemtrails with Contrails here? The editors decided to post a photo of the latter for some reason.

    • How do you know what is in the trails? IF chemtrails are real (no, I’m not a believer), then they would look /exactly/ like contrails.

      Kinda seems like you’re more interested in sniping at the editors than in commenting on the content…

  12. The problem is how we elect our legislators. Our current system gives us the crazies from both parties. Eliminating gerrymandering and implementing some form of ranked choice voting would help us get more reasonable and qualified leaders which would reduce the # of ridiculous bills like this one.

  13. I nominate MTG to use her influence on the owners of, what, Space Lasers? Yes that’s right… Space Lasers to eradicate Chemtrails, not only in the confined borders of TN but the world.

  14. We used to have a problem with chemtrails in our state, but we simply refocused the Jewish space lasers to disperse them all.

  15. The controversy around Amendment #1 centers on its ambiguous wording, which has unintentionally aligned it with the “chemtrails” conspiracy theory.

    The amendment’s goal is to prohibit intentional weather manipulation, but its failure to explicitly address or dismiss “chemtrails” leaves room for misinterpretation. This vagueness is particularly problematic in the context of an election period, where the language could be exploited for political advantage.

    With a Republican majority in both the Tennessee Senate and House, the related Senate Bill 2691 stands a strong chance of passing, potentially fueling further misuse of the amendment’s language amidst sensitive political climates.

    The situation underscores the critical need for clarity in legislative language to avoid lending unintentional support to unfounded theories and to prevent off-the-wall political manipulations, and unintended consequences.

  16. Does anyone watch Futurama? Whenever Zap Branigan proclaims something/anything, his First Officer Kip responds with an audible sigh.
    This is the sound that I am making now as I watch intelligent discourse fly right out the window in almost all sectors of society and politics.

  17. As a long time resident of Tennessee I can attest that the Republican members of the legislature, comprising the “super-majority” are actually dumber than this bill would indicate.

  18. And I thought the aviation community was, on average, slightly more intelligent than the general population…
    This legislation does NOT bad “chemtrails,” and it is the pinnacle of irresponsible journalism to report that it does. The first clue is that the bill was written by republicans. Anyone want to bet as to the political affiliation of the author of this TRASH ARTICLE?
    NOWHERE in the text of the legislation does it mention “chemtrails,” a word deliberately put in quotes to give the reader the impression that the word was quoted from the legislation! “The party of science” and the party who claims to want to protect the environment is now scoffing at legislation that would prevent intentional dispersion of chemicals into the atmosphere for the purpose of geoengineering.

    • A Google search result confirms it’s a widespread theory: 16,200 hits in 0.29 seconds indicate many people search about chemtrails, highlighting the prevalence of this conspiracy theory. TRASH ARTICLE? The whole world is a dumpster. 🛬🛬🛬🛬🛬

      • Many people?!
        16,200 possible dupes out of 5.35 billion internet users is about 0.0001 percent of internet users. For practical purposes, I’d say that’s a statistical ZERO.
        I’d be more concerned about the majority percentage of people in this forum who take stock in this BS article!
        But your point is well taken.

  19. Sorry everyone, but whether intentional or not, this article deeply misrepresents this bill. The conspiracy theory about “chemtrails” is typically understood to refer to nefarious “mind control” or other unhealthy chemicals put into the air by governments to subdue the people. We all understand that is bogus. This Tennessee bill is something entirely different and refers to climate-mitigation techniques, which certainly has been proposed in the US, and is actually being used around the world. I went to a Continental engine rebuilding school with some gentlemen who were hired by the South African government to do tests on climate mitigation through aerial dispersion of chemicals – and this was many years ago. Agree with the bill or not, this is not a “conspiracy theory” or an entirely unreasonable proposition.

    • You’re right, Mr. John Cowan. There were some diverse experiences, even supported by public entities, that tried to change natural weather conditions (namely, “seeding” clouds to create rain) through aerial dispersion of chemicals (and not only “many years ago). If that is the leitmotif of the law, that’s not a intention to be criticized.

  20. The bill is less about airspace and more about the sky in general. Nothing in the Constitution directly references attempts to geoengineer through atmospheric means, so when all manner of proposed lunacy is given cred by attaching “because muh climate crisis”, and then enabled by, for instance, a regime that allows a surveillance balloon operated by a foreign power to complete its mission before “doing something about it,” a State may address the issue through legislation. A pre-emptive measure based on the principle of “just because you can doesn’t mean you should” which is often ignored when purportedly “noble” ends justify half-baked means.

    In other news, Attn. Paris Accordions – Simon Bar-Sinister called; he wants his weather machine back.

  21. This is an aviation website – not a political website. For you morons who don’t understand that; if you can’t talk about aviation without injecting political stupidity into the discussion, go somewhere else – please. The subject of contrails/chemtrails can be discussed as a scientific/aerospace context. Politics is polluting every aspect of our lives. Please leave the politics out of aviation. Just enjoy the love of aviation!

    • In case you don’t know, for the time being that is, we reside in a country where freedom of expression under the First Amendment is still a right. That said, you are more than welcome to sign out, or disregard responses that don’t meet your approval.

    • Uh… The article is about LEGISLATION, and specifically mentions the legislators and their political affiliation!! You can’t get much more political than that. If you don’t like thinking about politics, then why did you read the article?
      SHEESH!! I’m STUNNED by the apparent (lack of) intelligence displayed within some of these comments!!!

    • What’s more — you won’t have your municipal airports, your avgas, your airplane, or your freedom of travel much longer if you continue to ignore politics — especially in its current state.

    • Sorry, I have to agree with the other commenters. Stories that are fundamentally political like this one are fair game for civilied political comment.

    • It would be great to get back to aviation talk vs constant red vs blue. Although some of the responses are quite funny. So since we’ll never get away from the red vs blue, I propose a questions…Why is it most reds are just not funny? No sense of humor what so ever. Other than Tim Allen I can’t think of any funny red comedians. Let’s get a list going….

  22. “Many people are gullible, we can expect this to continue”. P.T. Barnum.

    Geoengineering, HA! What could possibly go wrong with that?

  23. I’m afraid I am guilty of knowing too much about science, physics, chemistry and aerospace, which makes me sad to think of the company I keep considering all the idiots, morons, fools and tools in these threads of nattering nabobs of politicism. Engineering training deals with the exact sciences. That sort of exactness makes for truth and conscience. It might be good for the world if more men had that sort of mental start in life even if they did not pursue the profession. ― Herbert Hoover

  24. The bill may or may not be necessary, but it is free and it might just flush out some roaches if some light is shined upon them. Where as do we want chemtrails? So why not a bill against the use of them?


    AMENDMENT #1 rewrites the bill to prohibit the intentional injection, release, or dispersion, by any means, of chemicals, chemical compounds, substances, or apparatus within the borders of this state into the atmosphere with the express purpose of affecting temperature, weather, or the intensity of the sunlight.”

    Let’s skip past the chemtrails misdirect and talk about the law. It is not Tennessee that controls the airspace above it’s borders, it is the FAA. This has been made very aware thanks to the explosion of drones flying above us and all the controlled airspace above us as well.

    There is no way for TN to enforce this…thus it is a stupid bill. There is no way for TN to even investigate for again, a plane dumping anything from it is in FAA’s jurisdiction…thus a stupid bill. There is no provision for when a “chemplane” dumps whatever just outside the TN border but prevailing winds send it over TN border and unless TN plans to craete giant fans to blow it away from their fine state…bad actors just dump upwind and watch the fun.

    This is a stupid bill, not because of the stated amendment above, because it does not solve one damn thing but feed a group of people to keep voting for politicians that present such bills so they can (1) stay in office whilst being dumb and (2) distract people so they don’t pay attention to the fact that said politician has not really done anything to help their lives be better.

    As an added thought, this does nothing to help mitigate global climate change which TN will be effected by more and more.

    • The FAA controls the airspace, not the composition of the air. They do not have jurisdiction over environmental (e.g., air quality) laws.

    • That was my first thought; apparently the members of the Tennessee legislature don’t realize that the air above their fair state is not static. Every day brings a whole new atmosphere, generally from the west, into their borders.

    • Have you looked at our skies? We, the people do not want to be sprayed with chemicals from unknown sources. Were sick of this b.s. from liberal dem representatives who want to ruin our land and our people or turn a blind eye due to pay offs.
      We are being sprayed, i do give a crap about any reason they claim. It isnt natural. We are already buying nasty gmo crap from supermarkets while other countries ban its very existence! We are the unhealthiest nation with the highest priced pharmaceuticals.
      Its all about power and money with the left, nothing is sacred or pure anymore. Everything is corrupted from our soil and water to the minds of men.
      I am proud of our Republicans and if not for most of them we would all have lost this country years ago.
      Also i would think as most people should that once they bring this to the attention of others that other states will follow suit. So its not so stupid after all.

  26. As Mark Twain said, “Suppose you were an idiot, and suppose you were a member of Congress; but I repeat myself.”

  27. I am so embarrassed to be a Tennessean now. I never thought politicians could get lower than simply being stupid, but alas, this is disheartening.

    • Have you looked at our skies? We, the people do not want to be sprayed with chemicals from unknown sources. Were sick of this b.s. from liberal dem representatives who want to ruin our land and our people or turn a blind eye due to pay offs.
      We are being sprayed, i do give a crap about any reason they claim. It isnt natural. We are already buying nasty gmo crap from supermarkets while other countries ban its very existence! We are the unhealthiest nation with the highest priced pharmaceuticals.
      Its all about power and money with the left, nothing is sacred or pure anymore. Everything is corrupted from our soil and water to the minds of men.
      I am proud of our Republicans and if not for most of them we would all have lost this country years ago.

  28. Oh, one more thing!

    When Rep. Monty Fritts and Sen. Steve Southerland, elected by less than 20,000 voters in districts with about 70,000 people, propose laws impacting the entire state of 7 million and potentially the whole country of 333 million— in short, Disproportionate Influence—it raises concerns about the fairness of our democracy. It appears that a small group has significant influence over many, especially on critical issues like environmental laws and the role of scientific advice in policymaking.

    • Are you suggesting that representatives and senators NOT be allowed to propose laws which could have statewide impact?

      Then just how in hell do propose that laws be proposed?

      • My point is NOT to restrict legislators from proposing laws with statewide implications. Rather, I advocate for the essential duty of lawmakers to develop and propose legislation that is well-researched and broadly beneficial, aiming to minimize or eliminate UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES. It’s key that law-making is approached responsibly to prevent harm not just JURISDICTIONALLY but also to avoid broader, unforeseen negative impacts. Effective legislation should be crafted with a foresight that encompasses environmental, health, and economic considerations.

        A responsible law-making process involves:

        1. Comprehensive Impact Assessment: Laws should be evaluated in-depth to ensure they don’t lead to adverse outcomes.

        2. Public Consultation and Transparency: Engaging with the public and being transparent about the reasons behind proposing a law can foster trust and ensure that legislation is well-received.

        3. Ethical Standards and Public Interest: Lawmakers must adhere to high ethical standards, particularly focusing on the public’s benefit, which is especially crucial when re-election concerns might influence legislative priorities.

        4. Examples of Potential Unintended Consequences
        Consider the potential unintended consequences of this broadly written environmental legislation. Here’s a list of BENEFICIAL chemicals and compounds that, while not intended for weather modification, could theoretically be caught up in such laws due to their uses that involve atmospheric release:

        • Water Vapor and Silver Iodide for Cloud Seeding: Essential for precipitation enhancement, crucial for agriculture and water supply.
        • Dry Ice (Solid CO2): Used in cloud seeding and has various applications in science, food preservation, and entertainment.
        • Calcium Chloride: Applied in dust control for road maintenance, it could unintentionally affect atmospheric conditions.
        • Sulfur Dioxide: A byproduct of industrial processes with roles in climate and atmospheric chemistry; proposed in small quantities for geoengineering.
        • Ammonium Phosphate: Beneficial in aerial fire retardants, helping to control and suppress wildfires.
        • Urea: Employed in snowmaking, its primary purpose is recreational, though it could be seen as affecting weather.
        • Sodium Chloride: Utilized for de-icing, potentially influencing local atmospheric moisture and freezing points.
        • Titanium Dioxide: While proposed for SRM, its widespread use in paint and sunscreen indicates benign applications that could be inadvertently restricted.
        • Ethylene: Important in agriculture for ripening fruit; its atmospheric release for agricultural management might be impacted.

        These instances emphasize the necessity of preparing environmental legislation with precision to avoid impeding the beneficial use of chemicals. To prevent such unintended restrictions, laws must be clearly defined, focusing specifically on the activities and goals they aim to regulate. Not just throwing things at the wall to see what sticks.

    • Churchill said ” Democracy is the worst form of government… until you compare it to the rest”.

  29. “they are seeking to ban “the intentional injection, release, or dispersion, by any means, of chemicals, chemical compounds, […] with the express purpose of affecting temperature…”

    So no fire retardants will be allowed to be dispersed if & when the inevitable forest fire occurs?

    “How can we waste the taxpayer’s money today? Let’s ban Chem-trails!” (I hear that they make our children turn gay as well as altering the weather)

  30. The best way to make sure that Tennesseans won’t ever risk being exposed to chemtrails would be to ban all aircraft flying over Tennessee or to a state airport.

    The elected representatives can then take the bus when they want to travel anywhere. They should be really happy with that, right ?

  31. The Tennessee Bill has legs. “In a memo seeking support for his bill, Sen. Doug Mastriano (R-Franklin) said new technology and a proliferation of weather modification patents “owned by a combination of Federal Government Agencies, Non-Governmental Organizations, and large multinational corporations” have brought forward the need to update Pennsylvania’s law.
    Mastriano notes the Pennsylvania Constitution guarantees the “right to clean air, pure water, and to the preservation of the natural, scenic, historic and esthetic values of the environment.”
    “Spraying unknown, experimental, and potentially dangerous chemicals into the atmosphere without the consent of the people of Pennsylvania is a clear violation of Article 1, Section 27 of the PA Constitution,” Mastriano’s memo states.
    Sen. Doug Mastriano, R-Franklin, joins GOP colleagues in Fulton County, Pennsylvania on July 23, 2021, to respond to decertification of voting machines.

    The legislation would ban the release of substances within the borders of Pennsylvania to affect the temperature, weather or intensity of sunlight. It would mirror legislation that passed in the Tennessee Senate on Wednesday.
    Mastriano, an election denier who lost his 2022 gubernatorial bid to Gov. Josh Shapiro, has made repeated references to the chemtrail conspiracy theory on social media.”

  32. Its painfully obvious to most people with common sense and who have lived in clear blue skies most of the their lives with REAL cloud cover, that the streaks throughout the skies put there by planes are chemicals which cannot be safe to breathe no matter why they are sprayed.
    Its also very obvious that they contain a reflective metal due to the reflection of the sun on the chemtrails revealing rainbows. Many times we now see double and triple rainbows due to the metals reflecting through the mist and sun.
    I suspect barium, aluminum, lithium, and more. Barium alone can cause horrific respiratory distress, not to mention higher alzheimers risk of aluminum and more.
    Through over 15 years of research and study and some whistle blowers who have been erased from the internet, i conclude that most of the information we are hearing about chemtrails being fake is a total cover up along with most of the replies in this article… almost all paid trolls to make us believe chemtrails are lies. Chemtrails are real and dangerous.

  33. Here in Arizona, a lawmaker from the same party for years has claimed the Federal government is spewing poison from airplanes to kill off the population.