How to Bust Chemtrails from the Ground, Very Simple

Originally posted by pikypiky
Yes, I see now. It is the word usage in Reich's "cloudbuster" that created the confusion in my mind. At first glance, I thought Reich's Orgone Generator dissipated the "good" clouds that bring rain. But I am learning that the device is supposed to disperse "chemtrails", too; hence a "chembuster" appropriate.

From what I can make out, the idea is that it stimulates circulation of natural weather patterns. So it could either bring in clouds or disperse them.

It's funny, I don't see anyone making excuses for the Maine Blueberry thing. I was expecting someone to claim coincidence or that Reich was just an expert weather forecaster or something.

Originally posted by bsbray11


From what I can make out, the idea is that it stimulates circulation of natural weather patterns. So it could either bring in clouds or disperse them.

Claims about a device being able to control the weather that literally just makes the weather acts as it should don't sound too out of the ordinary to most. If what you can make out is true, it's an unfalsifiable claim.

They also say orgone devices can stop cell phone towers from using ELF frequencies to control your mind.

Saying "Why hasn't anyone verified it ?" or "If it is so effective, why aren't we using it all the time ?" etc is naieve.

The world we live in is full of "things that work but we dont know why". As examples, there are hundreds of medical breakthroughs which have helped thousands of people, but they have been buried by the established medical authorities simply because they are not generating money. Cancer cures, and more are all out there and have been proved by the people who were helped. I agree that they have not been 'proved' by science, but there are many areas of life not able to be proved by science. Dowsing is one other area, and homeopathy is used by thousands, millions world wide, but no-one knows how it works as 'officially' there is no substance left in the dose. Acupuncture has ben used for thousands of years by the Chinese - why would they continue to use it if it doesn't work? That is why asking why it has not been verified is naieve.

Anyway, back on topic. Many moons ago I read a book which said that DOR could be very dangerous if a person is in its proximity and several of Reich's scientists have been very ill when he was investigating orgone accumulators. So, with this in mind, we need to be careful how and if we use this unknown technology. It could be similar to the Large Hadron Collider - we just dont know what we are playing with.

There used to be a company selling rain-making service I read about too somewhere. Certainly in Thailand they believe it is possible so maybe this rainmaking thing is also connected to orgone and just like dispersing clouds why not attract clouds too. There is so much we still dont understand about our world.

Link to Australian company

Thinking about this some more, I have dabbled in this technology, and I wonder if this technology could divert or dissipate tornados. I have an equivalent to the Genesa Crystal in my apartment and no thunderstorm lightning flashes have come overhead or within about 3-5 miles in the past 6 years, although they have been all around us. I only count the time from the lightning until the thunder so it is a very unscientific measurement. These GC's are supposed to "wash/scrub the environment" - whatever that means!! Anyone in Tornado Alley want to try one?

Originally posted by qmantoo
Saying "Why hasn't anyone verified it ?" or "If it is so effective, why aren't we using it all the time ?" etc is naieve.

I disagree, a cloudbuster would be easily provable (by it dissapating clouds). These things are as effective as L Ron Hubbard being able to bust clouds with his mind.

Originally posted by qmantoo
The world we live in is full of "things that work but we dont know why".

Not really, most things are explainable by natural processes and science.

Originally posted by qmantoo
As examples, there are hundreds of medical breakthroughs which have helped thousands of people, but they have been buried by the established medical authorities simply because they are not generating money. Cancer cures, and more are all out there and have been proved by the people who were helped.

Like? Source?

Originally posted by qmantoo
I agree that they have not been 'proved' by science, but there are many areas of life not able to be proved by science.

I'm glad you understand it should be supported by science, but the second part of your claim is wrong. See above. If they were so effective the info would be disseminated through alternative news sources.

Originally posted by qmantoo
Dowsing is one other area, and homeopathy is used by thousands, millions world wide, but no-one knows how it works as 'officially' there is no substance left in the dose.

Actually the ideomotor effect is pretty well documented.

Originally posted by qmantoo
Acupuncture has ben used for thousands of years by the Chinese - why would they continue to use it if it doesn't work? That is why asking why it has not been verified is naieve.

The pain from the needles releases endorphins, has nothing to do with 'life energy'.

Originally posted by qmantoo
Anyway, back on topic. Many moons ago I read a book which said that DOR could be very dangerous if a person is in its proximity and several of Reich's scientists have been very ill when he was investigating orgone accumulators. So, with this in mind, we need to be careful how and if we use this unknown technology. It could be similar to the Large Hadron Collider - we just dont know what we are playing with.

Source? Is it unusual for people to be ill at certain times? We know what the LHC does, we knew what it would do before we turned it on. The scaremongers would have you believe otherwise, I'm afraid.

Irrelevant anyway, you are comparing the LHC, a marvel of modern science to some unfalsifiable psuedoscience.

Originally posted by qmantoo
There used to be a company selling rain-making service I read about too somewhere.

It's called cloud seeding.

Originally posted by qmantoo
Certainly in Thailand they believe it is possible so maybe this rainmaking thing is also connected to orgone and just like dispersing clouds why not attract clouds too.

The Thai use cloud seeding for 'rainmaking'. Here is a video:

Originally posted by qmantoo
There is so much we still dont understand about our world.

Again, not really. We know a whole lot more than you might think!

Originally posted by adeclerk
Claims about a device being able to control the weather that literally just makes the weather acts as it should don't sound too out of the ordinary to most. If what you can make out is true, it's an unfalsifiable claim.

Why don't you look at the OP for once. Maine was experiencing a drought, there were no forecasts for rain, Maine farmers put up a reward for anyone who could generate rain. Reich brought the device you see pictured in the OP, generated rain, and was paid for it.

You'll make what you want to of it, of course mock and insult me too, but the fact remains.

Originally posted by bsbray11
Why don't you look at the OP for once. Maine was experiencing a drought, there were no forecasts for rain, Maine farmers put up a reward for anyone who could generate rain. Reich brought the device you see pictured in the OP, generated rain, and was paid for it.

You'll make what you want to of it, of course mock and insult me too, but the fact remains.

That, my friend, is the difference between weather and climate. The climate in Maine is rainy. The weather happened to be dry for that period. It is a simple distinction.

I'm a bit confused at how a 'cloudbuster' that makes bad clouds (you know, the dark ones that cause rain) go away could bring rain, though.

reply to post by adeclerk


Your response to qmantoo above makes you sound as though you have made science your religion. Science is a tool and it has hard limitations. And there is plenty that is still not understood, or is misunderstood, or is just plain arrogance and out-of-hand dismissals by people indoctrinated in theories of the past. When you act like you already know most everything, what room have you left to learn anything new? You act as though there is hardly anything of importance left to be discovered. Any time a new idea comes along that isn't already taken for granted by textbook institutions, you seem automatically hostile and dismissive towards it. That is religious thinking.

Originally posted by adeclerk
I'm a bit confused at how a 'cloudbuster' that makes bad clouds (you know, the dark ones that cause rain) go away could bring rain, though.

I'm not surprised. You seem to have never made any serious effort to understand what was being described in the OP in the first place. You were in too much of a hurry to start mocking it and insulting me instead.

As has already been explained here numerous times, it has nothing to do with solely making clouds or dispersing clouds. The idea is that it stimulates a natural balance in weather patterns, which includes a circulation of weather systems.

Reich used the cloudbuster to conduct dozens of experiments involving what he called “Cosmic Orgone Engineering (C.O.R.E.).” One of the most notable occurred in 1953. During a long drought that threatened the Maine blueberry crop, several farmers offered to pay Reich if he could bring rain to the parched region. The weather bureau had forecast no rain for several days when Reich began his cloudbusting operations. Ten hours later, a light rain began to fall. Over the next few days, close to two inches fell. The blueberry crop was saved, and in local newspaper articles the farmers credited Reich.

www.wilhelmreichmuseum.org...

reply to post by bsbray11


We know the scientific method works, its proven. Anything outside of the scientific method is unfalsifiable (S (untestable and therefore non existent). Examples: orgone energy, crystal energy, psychic phenomena, psychokinesis, etc). Step back and weigh the evidence, you might find that your hypothesis was wrong. That is how we learn.

Originally posted by adeclerk
We know the scientific method works, its proven.

Sure, why not, but science also has limitations and is useless for anything outside of those limitations. Specifically our technology has to be such to demonstrate things physically and to totally isolate variables, which is not always easy. Quantum physics is already showing us things that we cannot physically explain without introducing invisible dimensions, like entanglement. On top of that science today is often been commandeered by big businesses who intentionally pay for junk science so you end up with different studies with contradictory results, and then all you have is a pissing contest like what you see with global warming, alternative energies, whether or not high fructose corn syrup is bad for you or different than regular sugar, whether or not fluoride is good to drink in water, whether depleted uranium is a health hazard, etc. etc. etc.

Anything outside of the scientific method is unfalsifiable (S (untestable and therefore non existent).

This is a blatant logical fallacy. Unfalsifiable does not mean "therefore non existent." It means there is no room for science to even be able to refute it if it was wrong, so therefore it is not testable. Stating that anything science can't prove, automatically can't exist, is taking science as your religion. This is your real problem. Maybe you think you've escaped woo-woo thinking, but really you've just subscribed to a different form of it.

Step back and weigh the evidence, you might find that your hypothesis was wrong. That is how we learn.

Not being able to prove a hypothesis wrong is where the word "unfalsifiable" comes from in the first place. Take a step back and weigh the difference between your faith in science and any other form of religion. You have come to erroneously believe that not being able to test an idea means it is automatically impossible.

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
It is a term you used - do you want to change your story again now?

I'm not changing my story, I'm reacting/responding to your constant weaseling.

So you used the term "legitimate" in relation to orgone, and then when I pointed out the obvious error it is me who is weaselling - yeah well that just about sums up your miscellaneous illogic.

And I didn't claim that it was a legitimate (rigorously proven) science.

And I didn't say that you did - perhaps you should go read what you wrote.

Right, first you say you aren't challenging what I said then you tell me to read my own posts about it.

Well yeah - 'cos apparently you've forgotten it - so it seems a reasonable thing to ask.

You claimed, and I quote:

You're telling me someone proved a negative somewhere (that the idea of orgone isn't legitimate) and it missed my attention?

And I said yes - it has proved that it isn't legitmate.

If you want to split hairs, I said the idea of orgone, not the science of orgone. Have you refuted the idea of orgone or not?

Weaselling much?

Once again, not being proven, is different than being positively refuted.

And if you were as clever as you think you are you would have noticed that I didn't actually say anything at all about it being refuted.

That's not what it looks like to me.

Of course not - if you bothered to read what I wrote you would have to backtrack on your fantasy, and it is pretty clear far too much of your personality is tied up it!

You are constantly playing words games to make it seem as though you have refuted something which you really haven't.

Word games? You mean like redefining chemtrail to include cloud seeding?

Dude you're the one who started all this definition palaver - don't blame me when you can't stand the heat any more!! :lol

Now come on - I've already asked you to up the ante on your trolling - it's really getting rather too obvious....good trolling should be quite a lot more subtle.

You can't prove a negative

And you can only argue from ignorance - YET AGAIN!

lol - I don't give a rotund rodent's rectum about your little ignorant argument meme - but every time you post it I get to prove your lack of logic - thanks dude

and you're pissed about it.

Nope - but I will be in a few hours after a dance & some beers - spot ya then chemmie

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


What point does it take for you to relate unnatural planetary conditions are being formed ALL the time by things you consider "Normal".

And realize something as well,, we just have suddenly gained a hell of alot of "STRENGTH"

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
So you used the term "legitimate" in relation to orgone, and then when I pointed out the obvious error it is me who is weaselling - yeah well that just about sums up your miscellaneous illogic.

I was using the term "legitimate" to describe an idea, as in not already being refuted, and you started trying to weasel phrases in such a way so as to make it sound as though orgone has already been positively refuted.

So do you have the evidence to prove that orgone energy doesn't exist or not?

Of course you don't, but like I said, that pisses you off so you keep trying to find ways to weasel in some clever spin on things, and it just doesn't work.

Well yeah - 'cos apparently you've forgotten it - so it seems a reasonable thing to ask.

If I had forgotten what I had said, then why did I reiterate the same thing to you, so that you said you were not stating otherwise? Go ahead and try to tie this discussion into rhetorical knots. It's obvious to me that the trolling is not on this end.

If you want to split hairs, I said the idea of orgone, not the science of orgone. Have you refuted the idea of orgone or not?

Weaselling much?

I take that as a "no," but I already knew as much.

Of course not - if you bothered to read what I wrote you would have to backtrack on your fantasy, and it is pretty clear far too much of your personality is tied up it!

This is you projecting your own issues onto me.

Word games? You mean like redefining chemtrail to include cloud seeding?

You want to keep beating that dead horse, huh? Show me a dictionary definition of the word "chemtrail." And no, Wikipedia is not a dictionary.

Dude you're the one who started all this definition palaver - don't blame me when you can't stand the heat any more!! :lol

You can make up whatever definitions you think help you, I don't feel it getting any warmer.

And you can only argue from ignorance - YET AGAIN!

I am not claiming to have proof so no, I am not arguing from ignorance. Keep repeating yourself, so will I.

This is what pisses you off, because I'm not claiming to have proof of it, and you can't prove it wrong, so there is a vacuum of data and it makes you uncomfortable because you can't "win" this stupid bickering contest.

lol - I don't give a rotund rodent's rectum about your little ignorant argument meme - but every time you post it I get to prove your lack of logic - thanks dude

Claiming I am making an argument from ignorance when I am not even making an argument in the first place is a lack of logic.

Same old science vs beliefs - but with a twist. There IS proof that this technology works but the goverment and scientific communities are not having any of it.

Just some links which give ample proof that goverments would rather spend our money on keeping the status quo and NOT saving it to be spent on other more useful projects.
This one is particularly useful and will do demos for nothing and they have dvds of past successes using orgone technology

Link 2
Link 3
Link 4

Link 5

Link 6
Link 7
Link 8

The point is, taking the millions and billions the governments have to spend cleaning up after floods, fires, tornados, etc why not give it a try? It is difficult to believe that there is NOT some conspiracy going on.

Ideomotor effect is an undeniable fact. HOWEVER, it still does not explain how many of these things work more times than statistcal chance. Your replies make generalities and do not address the issues - in fact, they are very similar to what a paid/unpaid disifo agent would say when up against a wall of present and historical circumstancial evidence.

Again, not really. We know a whole lot more than you might think

I have no doubt that there is a lot more going on under the covers than most people think. The Russians were using radionics back in the cold war so do you think they would be using that technology if it was unprovable hogwash? No... I dont think so. I think it is you who are ignorant of what is available by not considering all possibilities. But then.. maybe you have your own reasons?

Good thread OP, started good anyway, before i saw the pages of replys are just the same usual debunkers who dont belive in chemtrails or anything related...

Just buy a chembuster for yourself and try it, this scientist has plenty of evidence, if that video of that trail dissapating isnt enough, what is ?

or is that due to atmospheric conditions...... Yeah right loooooool

Its funny to think that they've got helicopters scoping people out who have a chembuster, must be pretty annoying to have there plan not working lol

reply to post by bsbray11

Let me preface this by saying that I only very recently (within the past few days) started engaging people on this forum about chemtrails. Immediately I see that there is an apparent legion of disinformationists here who will all dog your every post for hours with deflections, putting words in your mouth, and all kinds of childishness.

I will be civil if everyone else is.....I would like to state that I tried to give up on this subject......... I tried not to reply to your thread..... I couldn't help it...... It is getting to the point that I am taking pics while fishing. I just uploaded this pic. Notice the date and time are different. This is because I have to take the battery out to charge the battery. (Just wanted to point that out, also I tried to resize. unsuccessfully)
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/e139ba816c43.jpg[/atsimg]

It is my first attempt with a crappy camera. I am dedicated to getting to the bottom of this.... I mainly need to bookmark your thread so I can read it fully. That was my intention. I need sleep. I will be back on later today. I have to star and flag you for the style of your thread.

ETA: I almost forgot to add that the humidity was about 78%. I have the link and I posted it in the other thread. I think they updated the weather page.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

A conglomerate of metal strands, quartz and polyester to repel chemtrails.

Hummm... A lot of blank spaces in such assertion.

Originally posted by adeclerk

Originally posted by qmantoo
Saying "Why hasn't anyone verified it ?" or "If it is so effective, why aren't we using it all the time ?" etc is naieve.

I disagree, a cloudbuster would be easily provable (by it dissapating clouds). These things are as effective as L Ron Hubbard being able to bust clouds with his mind.

Originally posted by qmantoo
The world we live in is full of "things that work but we dont know why".

Not really, most things are explainable by natural processes and science.

Originally posted by qmantoo
As examples, there are hundreds of medical breakthroughs which have helped thousands of people, but they have been buried by the established medical authorities simply because they are not generating money. Cancer cures, and more are all out there and have been proved by the people who were helped.

Like? Source?

Originally posted by qmantoo
I agree that they have not been 'proved' by science, but there are many areas of life not able to be proved by science.

I'm glad you understand it should be supported by science, but the second part of your claim is wrong. See above. If they were so effective the info would be disseminated through alternative news sources.

Originally posted by qmantoo
Dowsing is one other area, and homeopathy is used by thousands, millions world wide, but no-one knows how it works as 'officially' there is no substance left in the dose.

Actually the ideomotor effect is pretty well documented.

Originally posted by qmantoo
Acupuncture has ben used for thousands of years by the Chinese - why would they continue to use it if it doesn't work? That is why asking why it has not been verified is naieve.

The pain from the needles releases endorphins, has nothing to do with 'life energy'.

Originally posted by qmantoo
Anyway, back on topic. Many moons ago I read a book which said that DOR could be very dangerous if a person is in its proximity and several of Reich's scientists have been very ill when he was investigating orgone accumulators. So, with this in mind, we need to be careful how and if we use this unknown technology. It could be similar to the Large Hadron Collider - we just dont know what we are playing with.

Source? Is it unusual for people to be ill at certain times? We know what the LHC does, we knew what it would do before we turned it on. The scaremongers would have you believe otherwise, I'm afraid.

Irrelevant anyway, you are comparing the LHC, a marvel of modern science to some unfalsifiable psuedoscience.

Originally posted by qmantoo
There used to be a company selling rain-making service I read about too somewhere.

It's called cloud seeding.

Originally posted by qmantoo
Certainly in Thailand they believe it is possible so maybe this rainmaking thing is also connected to orgone and just like dispersing clouds why not attract clouds too.

The Thai use cloud seeding for 'rainmaking'. Here is a video:

Originally posted by qmantoo
There is so much we still dont understand about our world.

Again, not really. We know a whole lot more than you might think!

Are you honestly, really suggesting that science has never been wrong, never come to false conclusions? Are you honestly suggesting that all scientists agree on everything? Because that's the dishonest line of argument you are using to rubbish what people are saying.

So, here - prove that scientific conclusions are NEVER wrong. If you can't prove that, your argument is unsustainable.

Originally posted by bsbray11

You want to keep beating that dead horse, huh? Show me a dictionary definition of the word "chemtrail." And no, Wikipedia is not a dictionary.

A couple of minutes searching gives us the following dictionary definitions for "chemtrail"............

The Urban Dictionary

The Skeptic's Dictionary

Word Spy - The Word Lovers Guide To New Words

The Free Dictionary

Orgone is nothing but pseudoscience. The idea was quickly discredited and then dismissed. Funnily enough, independent scientists have not been able to prove its existence. Only true believers in orgone energy have been able to find success with demonstrations. (I wonder why )