Geoengineering - caught in the act?

Originally posted by Chadwickus
That's 193 countries buddy

Still only one signature each And I would add my name to that list... last thing I need is them cooling things down and bringing on that ice age even sooner

But since when do the PTB care about signatures and what I think? There was paper signed about weapons in space too... that didn't stop us either

Nice to see this thread is still going strong and it's nice to see many new members contributing as well.

Thought this article released today would be a great addition to this thread.

GE rejects Republicans’ climate change doubts

www.ft.com.../rss/world_us_politics/feed//product#axzz1oucrqmbN

“We found enough data there to have a company like GE respond and we have responded,” said Mark Vachon, head of the “ecomagination” sustainable business initiative GE launched in that year. He said revenues generated by operations in his portfolio now totalled $100bn and were growing at more than twice the rate of those in the rest of the company.

GE’s environmental strategy had also helped it shave $140m from its own energy bill and meant “we’re viewed as relevant in the world”, he said.

Separately, Christiana Figueres, the official who heads the Bonn-based UN secretariat that runs global climate negotiations, said the Republicans’ views posed a choice for US voters about whether they wanted to benefit from the global push towards new clean energy technologies some of their rivals had already embraced.

“Is the US electorate willing to allow the competitive edge on technology to go to China or to Europe, or would they prefer to be the leaders of technology? That is a question that they need to answer,” she said at a news conference in London on Friday.

Mitt Romney, the Republican party’s presidential frontrunner, has said “we don’t know what’s causing climate change on this planet”, and Rick Santorum, his closest rival, has described climate science as “political science”. Newt Gingrich, the former Speaker of the House of Representatives, has said “global warming is not proven”.

The Republicans’ stance puts them at odds with politicians from many other countries, especially in Europe, home of some of the world’s most ambitious climate legislation.

Things most certainly are ramping up. More people are discussing this topic behind the scenes, but their talks are coming out into the open now. Soon, the debunkers will have to come to terms that this technology brings in too much money to not exist. Especially seeing that it is a topic for debate in the Presidential elections proves that you can't keep the lid on for much longer.

reply to post by Afterthought


What does GE's green energy plan have to do with geoengineering?

reply to post by Chadwickus

GE’s environmental strategy had also helped it shave $140m from its own energy bill and meant “we’re viewed as relevant in the world”, he said.

They are a powerful company and I'm sure that certain governmental figures and lobbyists are quite concerned with how much money can be made and invested through the use of this technology. If GE manufactures the products and equipment necessary to conduct climate modification projects, I'm sure they have nothing to lose. The more investors they obtain, the higher their stock goes. It's a win-win situation for many people.

Edit to Add: Please note that he says "world" and not "nation" or "country".
After all, climate change must be a global initiative if it's to work according to plan.

reply to post by Afterthought


What technology?

All I'm seeing from them, besides the usual PR spin is a greener, cleaner direction.

Here's their portfolio:

www.ecomagination.com...

Please point out the GE technology that is used for geoengineering.

reply to post by Chadwickus



You're funny.
C'mon! You know this is strictly classified stuff. You think they're going to advertise on their website any possible working prototypes they've created and are ready for mass production as soon as they give the go ahead for climate engineering?



Seriously.

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by burntheships

 

I still didn't LINK to it DID I?

Why, yes you did, sorry Chad. You however were just wanting to highlight the snippet
you used to push forward your fallacy... and ignore the mulitple citations
Wikipedia has on the Weather Control page,
including Weather Control and Law.

I mean there's a link to wikipedia's privacy policy on that page too, I suppose I linked to that as well??

desperation showing...your clouding the issue.

And it still has nothing to do with the 190 odd signatories that I originally pointed out.

Of course it does. Your assertion is the cherry picking fallacy. See your next quote below.

This quote was ALL I WAS TALKING ABOUT

Of course, thats the way a cherry picking argument is set forth

GEDDIT?

Yes, I GEDDIT that you were cherry picking.

Maybe you need to read up on the National Security and Homeland Security
Presidential Directive. The directive released on May 9th, 2007 and
do your homework, find that it is still in effect.

www.globalresearch.ca...

reply to post by Afterthought


You're pretty funny yourself actually, since you just said "their talks are coming out into the open now", yet it's also all top secret and classified.

You're seeing something that's not there mate.

Like the lens flare you thought was a star.

You aren't as switched on as you think you are.

Nice thread! I thought some may enjoy this video discussing how cloud seeding was used during the Viet Nam war to put 12 inches of rain on the hochi min trail (sp?) in a few months (more accurately stated in the video).

reply to post by burntheships


I'm not going to play your games any more.

I did not link to the weather modification page and you know it.

You are deflecting because you have no answers to why 193 countries signed an agreement to not carry out geoengineering so you're putting words in my mouth instead.

Oh and why would I cherry pick (suppress evidence) from my own thread??

You make no sense!

ETA:

What you're basically suggesting I'm doing is this...(I'll use another subject for the example though)

I link to the wikipedia page about horses.

You go to the page and then click on the mammal link in the sentence that says It is a single-hooved (ungulate) mammal belonging to the taxonomic family Equidae.

This is when you proceed to tell me that I just linked you to a page about mammals, despite the fact that you had to click a link within the horse page to get there, I somehow manage to be the one that sent you to the mammals page...

After so many pages we still have a few questions that seem to never be answered.


If contrails were not possible that night then why did the OP state the first two were contrails, and that "other planes" made the rest?

In the later pictures we go from a clear sky with 2 contrails (with planes) to fingered clouds that the OP says were chemtrails that spread out.

Why no pictures of the vast number of "other aircraft" as they filled the sky in under 10 mins with the fingered like clouds?

Why no pictures of these chem trails starting out as thin before their big expansion?

Has anyone EVER seen a contrail or chemtrail spread out from a initial thin stream to the very large fingered cloud in under 10 mins? We still see the first two in the last few pictures, they are still thin and breaking up.

Do you all realize the sheer number of planes and chemicals needed to cover such expansive area of the sky? I do not think it is possible to do with airplanes in 10 mins, or to have the chemicals spread out so quickly in a 10 min window.

I just can't believe the OP was so completely diligent in everything, but to actually take the smoking gun pictures...geez

None of you have sat out on a clear night and seen this type of clouds come and go? I like to sit out and smoke a cigar watching the stars and it is frustrating on a clear night when I get a short interruption of thin layered clouds that form quickly, but a little while later the night is clear again.

reply to post by reitze


Cloud seeding. Check!

Vietnam War, and Agent Orange. Check!

Same as above, code-name "Operation Popeye". Check!


However, none of that has anything at all to do with "geoengineering" as is claimed in this thread's Opening Post and premise.

The activity and attempts at what is known as "cloud seeding" are done to increase (or mitigate and suppress, depending on the desired outcome) precipitation form clouds that are able to produce precipitation. The OP's examples were of cirrus clouds....and, cirrus clouds never produce precipitation that reaches the ground.

So, "cloud seeding", as a (so far) not completely 100% always successful technique is something that when it works, is localized in scope....affecting local weather. Not overall climate, nor climate trends.

"Geoengineering", on the other hand, as a fully-realized concept, is intended (if and when it is ever implemented large-scale....so far, it is NOT!) to influence the climate on a Global scale.

And, that is what fuels the controversy over whether to do it, at all!

reply to post by Xtrozero


This was my point, pages back.....:

None of you have sat out on a clear night and seen this type of clouds come and go? I like to sit out and smoke a cigar watching the stars and it is frustrating on a clear night when I get a short interruption of thin layered clouds that form quickly, but a little while later the night is clear again.

....when I posted time-lapse video of clouds.

This thread's multiple single exposures are not the full story, and also as noted, this is very far from a fully comprehensive "investigation". I'm sorry to say, it is loaded with a heavy confirmation bias from the outset, and thus suffers in terms of a scientifically-accurate type of study.

reply to post by Chadwickus


I take it you've never heard of the Totalitarian Tiptoe.
All of this is being leaked very slowly. I didn't misspeak nor suffer any confusion when I mentioned how their talks are now being discussed on the MSM. This is all by design and is simply another form of psychological warfare. As they're giving this info to us in drips and drops, we're slowly getting desensitized and are being conditioned to simply accept what they're going to be shoving down our throats in the near future anyways.

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by Xtrozero

 

This was my point, pages back.....:

None of you have sat out on a clear night and seen this type of clouds come and go? I like to sit out and smoke a cigar watching the stars and it is frustrating on a clear night when I get a short interruption of thin layered clouds that form quickly, but a little while later the night is clear again.

....when I posted time-lapse video of clouds.

This thread's multiple single exposures are not the full story, and also as noted, this is very far from a fully comprehensive "investigation". I'm sorry to say, it is loaded with a heavy confirmation bias from the outset, and thus suffers in terms of a scientifically-accurate type of study.

The simple reason why such a large area of the sky went from clear to the fingered clouds in well under 10 mins is because there was no expansion at all. The expansion theory would have taken hours at least with hours of over flies to fill the sky. The reason there was no expansion needed is because the water vapor in the air hit the right condition and formed all over at once, so that is why we went from nothing to a rather full sky in such a short time.

We see this in the OPs picture where you can see the start of it and it just happens to be the same finger outline as it is in his last pictures.

Very clear sky


Time: 8:43

A few minutes later and we have haze as the water vapor in the air start to form the cloud. If you look to the right of the moon you can see the faint out line of two of the fingers forming. The reason why the OP goes to the full formation is because all he could do would be to take pictures of the whole formation forming at once as we see the start of it in the picture below.


Time: 8:54

reply to post by Curious and Concerned


It's quite obvious you don't read all of my posts on this site! I have stated many times, I don't care about the star system! I don't care if I have 100,000 stars or 10 stars. It only shows an agreement from other users, that's all. Again, I understand all the principals of contrails. Our fine government has a "history" of experimenting with total disregard for it's citizens! Wake up from your slumber!

reply to post by Gmoneycricket


Gmoneycricket, thank you for those links! I will read in depth at a later date!
Obligatory second line.

Regarding the constant discussion of disinformation agents (and this isn't directed at yourself Chad) ... I find the constant self congratulating and assuming that a nerve has been struck because a few serial posters show up (or don't) quite face palm worthy. It's no more evidence for anything than a skeptic believing their version of reality is correct because no one is arguing, or assuming the people that are are paid loonies. It's lazy thinking IMO, and an excuse half the time to pretend like some posters are Sherlock Holmes taunting Don Moriaty from the side of a wind swept boat peer while he escapes.

It may shock and stun, but 90% of the posters who believe contrails are innocent would be surprised if they were proven wrong and react accordingly. There wouldn't some shadey damage control meeting, or some collapsing of a personal nebula over it. The other 10% are the same as people who refuse not to believe and still probably would think people are wrong.



Pinke, I don't like people that don't think outside the box! This is not aimed at you. I have been on this earth a long time, and I know what was, and what is now. Your senses are your most powerful guide in life, and I use mind to the fullest. And I sense the disinformation agents on this site are a structured group sent here for a defined purpose. I will never back down from this subject. If it turns out I'm wrong down the road, I will be the one eating crow, and my credibility will be zip, but it won't play out that way.

Originally posted by Xtrozero

The simple reason why such a large area of the sky went from clear to the fingered clouds in well under 10 mins is because there was no expansion at all. The expansion theory would have taken hours at least with hours of over flies to fill the sky. The reason there was no expansion needed is because the water vapor in the air hit the right condition and formed all over at once, so that is why we went from nothing to a rather full sky in such a short time.

We see this in the OPs picture where you can see the start of it and it just happens to be the same finger outline as it is in his last pictures.

Very clear sky


Time: 8:43

A few minutes later and we have haze as the water vapor in the air start to form the cloud. If you look to the right of the moon you can see the faint out line of two of the fingers forming. The reason why the OP goes to the full formation is because all he could do would be to take pictures of the whole formation forming at once as we see the start of it in the picture below.


Time: 8:54

edit on 12-3-2012 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)

You not embarrass yourself by calling the moon the sun? Now your back with this crap?

Those are taken 11 minutes apart. That is not the same plane and even your deny everything friends will tell you that.

Your previous post you say I don't post picture of the skinny lines.. now you just debunked yourself...

Debunk: fail

Originally posted by Captain Beyond
reply to post by Curious and Concerned

 

It's quite obvious you don't read all of my posts on this site!

No, I haven't gone and read all your posts, and why would I want to? You present false information as fact, and refuse to accept that it's wrong when it is pointed out to you with associated evidence, something your claims lack. You refuse to answer questions, so it has been impossible to have an intelligent conversation with you. But you can change that...

Originally posted by Captain Beyond
Again, I understand all the principals of contrails.

Yet you have shown a complete ignorance on the topic and refuse to answer this question that I will ask one more time.

Do you deny that a contrail can persist in the atmosphere in the right conditions?

If you refuse to answer this again, it will show that you are a liar and that you cannot have an intelligent conversation.

Originally posted by Captain BeyondOur fine government has a "history" of experimenting with total disregard for it's citizens! Wake up from your slumber!

I am well aware that experimentation occurs and I have never claimed that it is not occurring. Once again, you do not even respond to the information in my posts and can only produce strawman arguments with no relevance to my posts.

So, are you ready to answer the question? Or do you want to carry on obfuscating the topic, call people names and make irrelevant arguments.