Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
GeoEngineering
02-06-2014, 12:53 PM (This post was last modified: 02-06-2014 12:56 PM by Three Pipe Problem.)
Post: #21
RE: GeoEngineering
Mike, one of the signs of a first-class intellect is reassessing one's positions as evidence unfolds. Lately it seems a lot more is coming out about this.

I look at the assumption we can be certain about black ops as one that far overreaches. Even with a whistle blower who performed a relevant job function in the military, this is just one person's account. This is why I find the certainty of e.g. polguy somewhat ironic. We as a species seem to pay little heed to the notion that much could escape our grasp. Despite what I said earlier, I can't claim to know for sure what is going on... only that I have seen enough to be wary of geoengineering.

If people have already dug into the "sensible" or "skeptical" position it is difficult to change one's mind. But close analysis will reveal that the skeptical position is usually merely a wild guess or cultural preference.

To be explicit, consider *any* given proposition p. For example, p could be "There is a secret geo-engineeering program". The skeptical position relies on on implying that "not p" can be assumed, i.e. that the burden of proof is on the person making the "positive" assertion, not yet established by evidence, as opposed to a negative one. But this does not hold water logically. In a large number of cases there may be found a "positive" proposition q that means the same, for practical purposes, as "not p". In this case q could be "All geo-engineering programs have been disclosed." This puts the lie to the idea that any argument towards a negative (or a positive) can be privileged on that basis -- unless one is willing to accept that the "proper" skeptical position depends on which of two different ways an equivalent fact is worded (i.e. one can say p or equivalently, "not q"; alternatively on can say q, or equivalently, "not p").

If you think about it, this reveals how the so-called "skeptical" position is often simply an arbitrary one. It is simply a position that accepts as a default some brand of dogma, be it be scientific, political, or cultural. Lack of evidence for a claim should not be construed as evidence for an assumed or "default" position.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
02-07-2014, 07:52 AM
Post: #22
RE: GeoEngineering
I was a high school sophomore when Kennedy was killed. I remember the day like it was yesterday. I was watching CBS television, live, when Jack Ruby stepped out of the crowd and shot Oswald.

I have believed from that moment on that there was way more to that then we were told......and still believe it, to this day!

All over the world, those in power have used "murder" as a tool for "politics by other means".

I don't know how any "thinking man" could believe that those holding power in America are somehow "different".

I like the childish theory that unless those of us who suspect malfeasance can somehow "prove it" that it never happened!

That is exactly what a lot of tyrants in the history books wanted their "subjects" to think!

TWA Flight 800 exploded in the night sky, just south of Long Island, NY on the evening of July 17, 1996, taking 230 people to their deaths. American law REQUIRES the NTSB to investigate all civil air crashes. Despite that the main investigation was led (controlled) by the FBI, aided and abetted by the CIA (the spooks? what expertise do they have in air crash investigation?).


The United States govt "annointed" the New York Times as the "official spokesman" for the government and all information released to the public, came through them! But we all know that this kind of stuff does not happen in America!

After a lengthy investigation the "official cause" was an explosion of jet fuel vapors, in the empty center wing fuel tank, by some sort of "electrical short circuit" that is not really explained. Oh they "tested" this theory on a junked 747 aircraft, on the ground. They couldn't make jet fuel vapors explode so they filled the empty tank....with propane gas and used an electronic ignition source, just to prove it would blow up. Kinda like NBC news did in the piece about the "exploding gas tanks" on Chevy pickups. They used a model rocket motor to ignite it, for the camera of course, and got caught doing so.....to their utter disgrace!

Over 250 eyewitnesses to the crash, are on the WRITTEN record as reporting seeing a "streak of light" ascend from the surface and intersect the aircraft's course, and explode. NONE of them were interviewed for the official investigation! A New York National Guard helicopter was within 2 miles of the explosion, and witnessed it! The pilot had done several tours in Viet Nam, and said that he had seen lots of "ordnance" detonate, and what he saw of TWA 800's last seconds was definitely "ordnance" as it was a white explosion, not the dull orange and black smoke of a "fuel explosion".

It has been said, by some still investigating this incident that you can go into the engineering department at Boeing, even today, and ask if they think the official explanation is correct.....and you will be laughed out of the room. The CIA produced an animated video of what they say happened and it shows the aircraft, after seperation of the entire nose, ahead of he wing, doing a "zoom climb" of over 3500 ft afterwards. This defies the laws of both physics and aerodynamics.

Despite all of this we still live with the "official explanation" which millions of Americans still believe......because they can't bring themselves to consider any other possibilities..........or that government could cover up such a thing!

This happened just a few months before Bill Clinton's second election win, during what was a very tight race at the moment. Could it be that he and his people did NOT want to deal with a possible terrorist action....or major disaster caused by the failure of a US military exercise that night?

It is very hard to "prove anything" when government controls ALL the evidence. But it is not that difficult to pick apart explanations, and find all the holes in them......and them ponder possible motives.......and see it all fit together as if it did indeed happen that way.

The government in power, anywhere, depends upon the "people" believing what they are told. Doubters and skeptics are frowned upon, and ridiculed, sometimes even disappearing.

But of course nothing like that could ever happen in America......or so we are told!

It has gotten so bad these days, that I don't believe anyone in power anymore. I do my best to check out, for myself, everything I see and hear. I have been called crazy, and lots of other names for my skepticism.

But I have not been called SHEEP!

WC
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
02-07-2014, 09:15 AM
Post: #23
RE: GeoEngineering
(02-05-2014 12:35 PM)polguy Wrote:  If they waste all of that aluminum, how will they have enough left for your hats?

Question: are tin foil hats made out of aluminum or tin. or do both metals work? What about copper, gold or silver?

ₒₒₒₒ ©(¯õ¿õ¯)® ₒₒₒₒ
Breitbart was here
Veritas vos liberabit
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
02-07-2014, 09:57 AM
Post: #24
RE: GeoEngineering
Jack Cashill is probably the leading investigative authority writing on the subject of what happened to Flight 800. He and James Sanders authored a book on the event. Sanders wife, Elizabeth, was a TWA flight attendant trainer, and lost over 50 friends, all TWA empolyees in the disaster, so it became very personal to them.

jack Cashill has authored numerous articles on this subject, and you can find them here:

Cashill articles

He has also written extensively in the pursuit of "deconstructing Obama" also a fascinating topic to read on.

People ask "why does this stuff matter"? It matters because the American people are entitled to know the truth about what their government does! This is the only way that "corruption of power" can be prevented!

WC
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
02-11-2014, 11:45 AM (This post was last modified: 02-11-2014 11:51 AM by taxfoe.)
Post: #25
RE: GeoEngineering
The cloud mechanics are hitting it hard in the skies over Little Rock, today. I can see up to four planes at a time, laying the grid. I have pictures, if anyone is interested. I also have samples of the oft mentioned fibers but there never seems to be a corner lab when I need one.

The narrator in the OP's link summed it up well. He isn't sure people are going to notice until they set the sky on fire.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
02-11-2014, 06:33 PM
Post: #26
RE: GeoEngineering
(02-06-2014 01:06 AM)Mike G Wrote:  I do believe that there is a concerted effort to try and control the population of the earth. : )

This has been going on since Malthus' talk back in the 1800's, we read about it and worried so in the 70's, but had the green revolution and better agricultural methods with fertilizers and hybrids crops. Demand still growing!

Cut to the quick, the main stay is still population control, you kill the population you kill the carbon foot print, lots of excess lard asses, don't think for one instance those sitting pretty don't notice. : )

Mike, what did Malthus say?

(many people get this backwards)
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
02-13-2014, 06:17 PM
Post: #27
RE: GeoEngineering
SOURCE

Is there a giant flying snake over Australia? Confusion over giant S shaped 'Rottnest Monster' spotted on radar



'There's no cloud, there's nothing to produce a rain echo, ... which we do see a lot, but not this particular shape," the local weather bureau's Neil Bennett told ABC News.

'They don't take on S shapes and things like that.

'The radar that we use are there for the detection of precipitation, it's basically just a beam going out and hitting the rain droplets or ice particles from hail . .

. . However, the monster was shortlived - a spokesman for the Department of Defence said in a statement today the image was actually a regular training activity involving ships and aircraft designed to prepare a Navy warship for an operational deployment.

'The environmental conditions over the West Australian coast at the time of the activity provided a unique opportunity for this routine activity to be visible on the weather radar display,' he said.

'This exercise is ongoing.'
______________________________________

Ooops! Nothing to see here.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
02-13-2014, 06:34 PM (This post was last modified: 02-13-2014 06:42 PM by Mike G.)
Post: #28
RE: GeoEngineering

Mike, what did Malthus say?


f220

I'm sure he said a lot but essentially it was our increasing populations of humans on the planet was about to exceed our planet's carrying capacity to produce enough food to sustain that population

Not unlike the idea that deer would eat themselves out of house and home unless car collisions, hunters and predators kept their populations in check.

taxfoe

today and yesterday was a clear sky and many contrails heading south, almost all were dissipated in a short amount of time, meaning not across the entire horizon, half the horizon or less than quarter the horizon depending on height of jet. interesting, as I remember them
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
02-13-2014, 06:46 PM
Post: #29
RE: GeoEngineering
SOURCE

Excellent, unintended, chem-trail pics!

1st shot is the best because even the most skeptical will have to admit the existence of the grid pattern. That's cloud construction. I see it almost everyday.

The fourth is good because it captures a more random pattern and an applicator plane in flight.

I can speak for the ninth because I've seen it so often. The trails, though greatly dispersed, are still intact. They will join or be joined by another grid.
_________________________

What was that about tin foil hats?
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
02-13-2014, 09:43 PM
Post: #30
RE: GeoEngineering
(02-13-2014 06:34 PM)Mike G Wrote:  
Mike, what did Malthus say?


f220

I'm sure he said a lot but essentially it was our increasing populations of humans on the planet was about to exceed our planet's carrying capacity to produce enough food to sustain that population

Not unlike the idea that deer would eat themselves out of house and home unless car collisions, hunters and predators kept their populations in check.

taxfoe

today and yesterday was a clear sky and many contrails heading south, almost all were dissipated in a short amount of time, meaning not across the entire horizon, half the horizon or less than quarter the horizon depending on height of jet. interesting, as I remember them

Ok, what you said about Malthus is true. I was hoping that you'd say, in addition, either

1) and we have to do something about it
or
2) and there's nothing we can do about it.

Most politicians site Malthus in support of 1), plans to do things about it, and most people think that Malthus says 1).

But Malthus says 2) - there will be starvation. Period. And there's nothing we can do about it.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread:

Contact Us | My Site | Return to Top | Return to Content | Lite (Archive) Mode | RSS Syndication