debunkers deniers skeptics bs artists can we establish this one small fact

reply to post by OccamAssassin


Thank you for your detailed explanation.

I do not deny that cloud seeding is real,...
But,..like the UFO phenomena,... It doesn't explain everything we see in the sky...

Are all the data that documents barium and other chemicals found in samples explained away with the "cloud-seeding" explanation?...

If the answer is yes, then I guess all that data is fabricated by people looking to make a name for themselves as tin-foil hat-wearing goofs...all of them...every single one..all nuts..all of them..every single one...wow...

Originally posted by coastlinekid
reply to post by OccamAssassin

 

I do not deny that cloud seeding is real,...
But,..like the UFO phenomena,... It doesn't explain everything we see in the sky...

it doesn't explain anything, because it is almost invisible and done in clouds - not clear skies!!

Are all the data that documents barium and other chemicals found in samples explained away with the "cloud-seeding" explanation?...

no - they are all (so far anyway) explained by the "not actually high levels at all" and/or the "you can't apply limits for water when you re testing dirt" explainations.

Originally posted by coastlinekid
reply to post by OccamAssassin

 

Thank you for your detailed explanation.

I do not deny that cloud seeding is real,...
But,..like the UFO phenomena,... It doesn't explain everything we see in the sky...

Are all the data that documents barium and other chemicals found in samples explained away with the "cloud-seeding" explanation?...

If the answer is yes, then I guess all that data is fabricated by people looking to make a name for themselves as tin-foil hat-wearing goofs...all of them...every single one..all nuts..all of them..every single one...wow...

I can't speak for the said data as I haven't seen it, though;

Could it be possible that chemicals found in the samples are a result of industrialisation?

Mexico City is prone to acid rainfall because of pollutants from industry.

Barium and many other chemicals will persist as they are insoluble.

It could be that the samples were tainted by pollution from industrial processes.

I'm not saying that this is what is happening but, it would stand to reason that it is highly likely and I would certainly expect a certain amount of pollutants in any rainwater sample taken.

reply to post by OccamAssassin


Thank you guys for keeping this discussion grounded,... I appreciate that,... and the info you have provided,...is enlightening...

What about, here it comes,... Morgellons,... I don't subscribe to the reality of it, but it is another fly in the ointment... so to speak...

My predilection tells me something is going on,... when it comes to the gov. telling the truth,... fuggetta bout it...

reply to post by Truther9111776


Not a very good post.. expecting a bunch of people to just write yes or no.. pretty silly, maybe even immature.

Originally posted by Truther9111776
does any geo engineering go on simple question should be a simple answer and the answer is not naming a form of this just if it goes on

Sorry, I edited your original post to make it appear a normal person wrote it (if you consider e e cummings "normal").

You've since changed the question to "geo engineering to alter the weather." Why?

As has been pointed out, it has gone on for decades in the specific form of "rain-making," i.e. cloud seeding.

It has also been studied as a means of potentially mitigating AGW. None of the principles studied have actually worked; and most were in fact well-documented failures. (See, "The Discovery Channel," or "The History Channel" specials on the various ill-founded theories and small-scale tests -- none of which involved "chemtrails" of any kind.)

It does not employ barium, aluminum or cause Morgellons.
It is not a secret "government" program.
It is not a secret at all.

Did you really not know any of this; since you've posted dozens of times on this topic, alone?
I know the site motto is "Deny ignorance," but why would anyone want to fake ignorance?

Happy now?

Deny ignorance.
jw

some very interesting replies

and some expected attitudes

the reason my question or terminology of questions changed

is simple due to the fact of simple confusion

i was not talking about chemtrails as some of you call them

i was asking about the general application of intentionally manipulating the weather

for whatever reasons


also

to the last poster

it helps when you respond to a question or debate with facts answers or questions

not attacking some one on an internet message board for the way they post their reply

reply to post by aceto


while the answer and question is simple

and the response is up to the responder

you could not answer a question and give your reasoning?

yes or no is simple and easy

but defeats the idea of talking with others about a topic

reply to post by jdub297


and maybe since there is 12 or more threads i have posted in or started on this subject

would it not be obvious to a 2nd grader that maybe the topic interests me

is this a bad thing

if this makes me ignorant

i would be alarmed to think of what that makes you

reply to post by TheLordVeack


while i understand what you are saying

i was not referring to contrails or chemtrails as some call them

i am merely trying to form a consensus among ats member posters that geo engineering for the direct intention of altering our planets weather occurs

Originally posted by Truther9111776
reply to post by jdub297

 

and maybe since there is 12 or more threads i have posted in or started on this subject
would it not be obvious to a 2nd grader that maybe the topic interests me
is this a bad thing
if this makes me ignorant
i would be alarmed to think of what that makes you

You needn't be alarmed by my answers or questiions. I didn't pretend not to know the amswer to a question you admittedly already know well enough to post in "12 or more threads."

That is not a personal attack, or insinuatiion; you asked a specific question, and I gave a specific answer. You've chosen not to answer my questions.

Your original post:

does any geo engineering go on simple question should be a simple answer and the answer is not naming a form of this just if it goes on

I've given facts and examples; but you didn't answer my questions to you.

Have you chosen not to confront the obvious, but to draw upon the "yes" or "no" answers to reinforce your own self-serving conclusions? (That's three questions; you have yet to answer any of them. Why not?)
(That's four.)

jw
.

reply to post by Truther9111776

i am merely trying to form a consensus among ats member posters that geo engineering for the direct intention of altering our planets weather occurs

i was asking about the general application of intentionally manipulating the weather for whatever reasons

These are new propositions altogether. If you are now referring to "our planet's weather" collectively or generally, then the answer is clearly, "No!"

We are opportunistically altering local weather through cloud seeding. Some people believe we are altering the Earth's climate through AGW, but that is open to question.

We are not altering our planet's weather in general

jw.

reply to post by jdub297



We may not be changing the climate.......but I'm pretty sure we are attempting to - see the links I provided earlier to "cool roofs" and carbon sequestration

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by jdub297

 

We may not be changing the climate.......but I'm pretty sure we are attempting to - see the links I provided earlier to "cool roofs" and carbon sequestration

Some people believe that one or more of these techniques may relieve the "heat island" effect, but no one has shown human sequestration to have any effect on the climate.

We have made many "attempts" ro change the climate; none compare to natural cycles and processes.

reply to post by jdub297


Yes that was the point I was trying to make - but the original question wasn't "are any geo-engineering processes actually changing the climate?"

It was "is hter any geo-engineering going on?" - which I interpret to mean is anyone trying it at all, regardless of efficiency.

so yes the effects are miniscule, if any at all - but the atempt is being made.