Induced Climate Change/Weather Warfare

reply to post by tsurfer2000h


Oh for heaven's sake!, Slim, whether the gun goes off by accident or on purpose: you're just as dead!

skyblueworld

They banned the users account on facebook after they posted this picture.

Link to source

Credible or not it's intriguing.

It is simply a ripped off image from the Paris Air show in 2011. The photo shows the water ballast testing tanks in a prototype Boeing 747 registration N6067E. It is industry standard to simulate weight and balance using water ballast tanks.

Now take a good look at the photograph. Notice the Airliners.net watermark? Also note that the person that uploaded it to facebook stripped off the photographers copyright? Is it any wonder that Facebook are aware of these types of images being ripped off from Airliners.net with sometimes the watermark edited out or the photographers copyright being cropped out? The original image taken at the Paris Air Show. The other alternative is that the photographer himself or an uploader to Airliners.net tipped off the abuse of copyright.

Link to original image.

www.airliners.net...

Another image by a different photographer.

www.airliners.net...

Another image of the same aircraft showing the water ballast tanks in the rear section of the main deck.

www.airliners.net...

More images inside showing the test equipment

www.airliners.net...

The aircraft itself.

www.airliners.net...

luxordelphi
reply to post by WonderBoi

 

Cloud seeding can go horribly wrong as the historical record shows us

What's that then?

Are you referring to the Lynmouth flood of 1952 and RAF cloud seeding experiments?

It's already been pointed out on ATS that such a link is, at best, illusory - www.abovetopsecret.com...

I've also heard a story that the Queensland floods of 2010-11 were because of cloud seeding using the Thai techniques - but in fact the cloud seeding was never actually done in Queensland - The Thais were approached in 2009, and agreement was reached. However it was being reported in late 2010 that the seeding was no longer required because of the heavy rain earlier that year, of which the March floods were a part - eg Sydney Morning Herald

so that link is non existent too.

The Chemtrail Community is forever using these water ballast images as some sort of proof. They spread like wildfire all over the web as 'evidence'. See following video of Boeing 787 Dreamliner testing.

Step inside for a tour of ZA001, the first 787 Dreamliner. Flight Test director Scott Peterson explains the black water tanks and other equipment onboard and the metal cone that flies from the back of the plane.

reply to post by tommyjo

The Chemtrail Community is forever using these water ballast images as some sort of proof.

Yup.
Makes one wonder why they have to blatantly lie in attempting to make their case.
"Oh crap. We have no evidence so let's make something up. Hey, here's a good pic! Let's use it."

reply to post by Phage


You've been posting on these boards for a few years and you've only just realized that??

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

No.
It was just another opportunity to point it out.

tsurfer2000h
reply to post by FyreByrd

 

You might want to take a look at Scott Stevens "Weather Wars" at:

Would that be the same Mr. Stevens that lied about his credentials and was fired for it?

www.metabunk.org...

I suppose it's possible. Regardless of either the truth or not of his dis-crediting (which is SOP treatment for those 'disrupting' the status quo), his photos and information is interesting.

Global dimming has been verified by climatologists in many parts of the world (see references in previous post).

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

Are you referring to the Lynmouth flood of 1952 and RAF cloud seeding experiments?

No.

reply to post by luxordelphi

Oh for heaven's sake!, Slim, whether the gun goes off by accident or on purpose: you're just as dead!

Only if it's pointed at you.

reply to post by luxordelphi


So what are you referring to when you said "Cloud seeding can go horribly wrong as the historical record shows us"?

Phage
reply to post by tommyjo

 

The Chemtrail Community is forever using these water ballast images as some sort of proof.

Yup.
Makes one wonder why they have to blatantly lie in attempting to make their case.
"Oh crap. We have no evidence so let's make something up. Hey, here's a good pic! Let's use it."

edit on 2/9/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)

And putting additives in the fuel? Nah, that couldn't be an option. We're talking particles on a nano scale, in case you didn't know. I love the way you all spin things.

And let's not be fooled to think, the government doesn't have employees, whose job it is to debunk.

reply to post by WonderBoi


Lest we forget, the NDAA 2014 fully legitimized Weather Modification & Geoengineering..

Try a Google search for: NDAA Weather

reply to post by Donkey_Dean


I just ran that through google along with a couple variations and I'm not seeing any obvious hits for the National Defense Authorization Act of 2014 and weather modification or geo-engineering? Can you share a link that would help show what you are referring to?

reply to post by Donkey_Dean


Same request from me as Wrabbit's. If I could take a look at the evidence, it'd be great. Thanks in advance!

swanne
reply to post by Donkey_Dean

 

Same request from me as Wrabbit's. If I could take a look at the evidence, it'd be great. Thanks in advance!

I don't know about his source, but here's what i've found.
H.R. 2977 (107th): Space Preservation Act of 2001

(B) Such terms include exotic weapons systems such as--
(i) electronic, psychotronic, or information weapons;
(ii) chemtrails;
(iii) high altitude ultra low frequency weapons systems;
(iv) plasma, electromagnetic, sonic, or ultrasonic weapons;
(v) laser weapons systems;
(vi) strategic, theater, tactical, or extraterrestrial weapons; and
(vii) chemical, biological, environmental, climate, or tectonic weapons.
(C) The term ‘exotic weapons systems’ includes weapons designed to damage space or natural ecosystems (such as the ionosphere and upper atmosphere) or climate, weather, and tectonic systems with the purpose of inducing damage or destruction upon a target population or region on earth or in space.

They were mentioning chemtrails 13 years ago. Why people still deny the obvious is beyond me???

While it's an interesting idea, and easy to let your mind run wild with. I'm highly convinced it's not nefarious.

Weather is a strange thing. Even with technology we can not pin point it from day to day. We know of ice ages and widespread drought prior to known human advancement in geoengineering.

Although if you blamed the NFL I could totally buy that. Only nice day in the NE for what seems like months and it happened to be on the superbowl.

husker13
While it's an interesting idea, and easy to let your mind run wild with. I'm highly convinced it's not nefarious.

Weather is a strange thing. Even with technology we can not pin point it from day to day. We know of ice ages and widespread drought prior to known human advancement in geoengineering.

Although if you blamed the NFL I could totally buy that. Only nice day in the NE for what seems like months and it happened to be on the superbowl.

I'm not sure why the science behind weather making is so hard to believe. It's really not, especially now that were in the nano stage of life.

tsurfer2000h
reply to post by WonderBoi

 

Operation Popeye is the proof. The military did it then; did they not??? I guess that was just a coincidence?

Operation Popeye...

So how many cloud seeding threads are you going to start before you figure out that it isn't some clandestine secret program?

As many as it takes for YOU to understand. Apparently, some still don't GET IT! How do we forget, what's already been proven successful? It's kinda like dismissing Tesla's work.

husker13
...Although if you blamed the NFL I could totally buy that. Only nice day in the NE for what seems like months and it happened to be on the superbowl.

I live less than 100 miles from East Rutherford, New Jersey (the site of the Superbowl), and I would say we had several dry 40 to 45 F days this winter, as we do every winter. That relatively nice day for the Superbowl was not a great rarity around here. It is normally NOT always cold and snowy every day during the winter, and this winter is no exception -- we have had several "relatively" nice days.