Hurricane Sandy: Be Thankful

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weather_mo … Convention

Apparently they are breaking it.

=D>

the best part of all of this, is that it says nothing about chemtrails and doesn’t even pretend to say we could actually cause a hurricane. I’ve actually seen articles on several of these methods. My favorite one so far is a certain microbe often involved in cloud formation, and modifying them to be more effective.

Which still wouldn’t produce a hurricane, lol.

on the matter of the treaty, alright. I looked into some more and foudn this

“Prior to the Geneva Convention, the United States used weather warfare in the Vietnam War. Under the auspices of the Air Weather Service, the United States’ Operation Popeye used cloud seeding over the Ho Chi Minh Trail, increasing rainfall by an estimated thirty percent during 1967 and 1968. It was hoped that the increased rainfall would reduce the rate of infiltration down the trail.[2]”

And Gobbo thinks we perfected it? 30% increased rainfall is an unlucky summer, not a hurricane.

also the treaty was signed after project stormfury was already begun. it also wouldn’t violate the treaty, from what I’ve read

It does, you have just not read the research where they actually covered up the real purpose and used it to make hurricanes get angry. :wink:

Precisely. The information is there, it’s just not as convenient as mainstream would like. :slight_smile:

Actually the best part about this is that you’re looking for it to say something about chemtrails.

rofl. At least you are good for a laugh.

look at the evidence posted that you were too much of a baby to post yourself. look at it and show me how it’s supports your ignorant bullshit.

Dude,

You’re looking at this treaty trying to find ‘chemtrails’

Really think about that for a second.

dude, you’re looking at a treaty about weather warfare and assuming it means we’re under attack

think about that

so if it doesn’t say something about chemtrails, they must exist because there is no information to confirm it. If it did say there was information about chemtrails and these were entirely benign, produced by aircraft over wide expanses of sky that really couldn’t possibly do anything except make pretty patterns, and did not work, it would of course be a cover up. And the actual use of silver iodide, dust etc which is actually dumped in small areas invisibly and does have an effect is of course a smoke screen. Just saying it: they don’t use the word chem trails is not equivalent to therefore they exist.

Au contraire at least everyone is having fun. :slight_smile:

That’s not what I’m saying at all.

I was hoping you guys would get there on your own, but I guess that is not going to happen:

The word chemtrail didn’t pop up until like the 90’s or something. Obviously this treaty isn’t going to say ‘chemtrails.’ … Come on.

I mean… is this what it’s come to? Because the words don’t literally match up we cannot stop and make some basic extrapolations that maybe there are different terms for the same technique?

Let’s put a bit of effort in here, guys.

As for finding information online, It’s inordinantely easy if you approach it the right way.

Most people get ‘scared’ away from conspiracy sites because… well I have no idea. They just cannot separate emotion from logic.

I put it to you that the internet (not just conpsiracies) is the realm of the real philosopher. If you cannot find information on a topic you want to know about without getting lost in disinformation and essentially giving up, then you’re not a real philosopher. On the flipside, if you hear about these topics that, if they were true, would change your conception of the world completely, and you have no interest in pursuing them, you are not a real philospher. I have no issue with the people that freely admit they don’t care, and just want to watch television. My beef is with people who come here and try and assert they are free thinkers when clearly they’re still in shackles.

With proper logic and some basic extrapolation, there is no information that can stay beyond your reach. This isn’t even the realm of actual conspiracies. This is just the realm of publically verifiable stuff that the public is ignorant to. It gets more exciting from here on out.

Is anything going to say chemtrails, based on how effective a line covering hundreds of miles of very diffuse gas is going to do anything at all? That’s what I said you seemed to have ignored that point. if it was chemical bombs that effect a small area I might start to see your point, because we know such things can have an effect, although we don’t yet know if such effects would of happened anyway because such science is young and doesn’t have enough trials to show adequate statistical effect.

No it comes to conjecture that doesn’t match with facts only to supposition based on your opinion.

Such as I went out of my way to read conspiracy sites, but they just seem to leap from weather testing happens, which everyone knows, to weather testing is used to adversely affect populations and particular a governments own. It gets more exciting if the gaps in your argument are filled by something other than a gap.

Meh. It’s easy to stand there and demand more and more evidence without any sort of counterbalance. That is the sign of an amateur skeptic. I’m not sure what else you want. I gave you the historical precedence, the treaty, and the fact that on any given day you can look up and see the government spraying chemtrails, and also a government official saying, 'Yes, we use chemtrails now."

So basically in the past and present I proved chemtrails occur with both empirical and written evidence.

You two have stood there and said ‘More evidence’ without at all trying to refute that anything I’m saying as inaccurate or otherwise not to believed. The only thing that we don’t have here is a goverrnment official going beyond what has already been said to say, “'This is a public statement where I say unequivocally on record that we are intentioanlly harming the public.” - and waiting for evidence of that nature is one of the signs that you’re completely off track. This is an important question: are you seriously expecting that kind of evidence, or are you not thinking this through properly? I hope to fuck that it’s not the former.

If you cannot make the leap from pretty much as much evidence as you could possibly get form the government, to what is the logical outcome (for it to be used for control rather than benefit), especially with a government and world citizen corporate populace that is overridingly eugenicist in their public philosophies, then there isn’t much more that I can say. I obviously do not have some secret tape where Holder is saying publically something that no government official would ever say.

I came to this conclusion having studied history extensively. There is no reason that stands up to any sort of logical, common sense, or historical scrutiny where, given the type of power weather modification would give, the US government would use it in a manner that benefits the public. That belief is completely childish and indicative of someone trying to hold onto the psychological stability of not having to view your own government with the suspicion it, by every fucking category you could think of, deserves.

So if you think I haven’t done enough in this thread, fine. I’m done.

You haven’t given any evidence that suggests that it’s even remotely possible to cause a hurricane with “chemtrails”. Honestly, this isn’t any different than anything else you’ve ever done on this board. It’s always the same. You assert a thing and then never once answer a question that starts with “How”. It’s because you don’t know “how”, because you’re stupid. Because “how” questions require you to actually know something about processes involved in the shit you make up. There are no “how” answers, Gobbo, because it’s all bullshit.

What does any one have to gain by spraying poison on people and causing hurricanes?

:evilfun: :evilfun: :evilfun: :evilfun: :evilfun: :evilfun: :evilfun:

Chemtrails here refers to weather modification. It’s kind of hard sometimes because that word has become a catch-all blanket term for a bunch of things. I think the general consensus isn’t that they are spraying ‘poison’ on the public so much as they are doing weather mod. above the public without any regard for their safety. I would think it’s likely they’re doing both things, given the tract record of the US government, but so far they have only come out and said they are chemtrailing for weather modification publicly.

for the record, the general consensus is that chemtrails are only believed in by nutters.