Notices
Reply to Thread
Page 41 of 41 FirstFirst ... 31394041
Results 1,201 to 1,227 of 1227

Thread: How do you see the world and what has happened or is happening? Part 2

  1. #1201  
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    6,598
    Quote Originally Posted by Coach791 View Post
    I can't speculate about weather modification. There appears to much theory, some plausible but like anything how do you prove secret government schemes exist. However I do believe there is some evidence that can be used in understanding if weather modification exists.

    The Environmental Modification Convention (ENMOD), formally the Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques is an international treaty prohibiting the military or other hostile use of environmental modification techniques having widespread, long-lasting or severe effects. It opened for signature on 18 May 1977 in Geneva and entered into force on 5 October 1978.

    This convention bans weather warfare. You don't have a global convention to come together and agree not to use weather manipulation for war purposes unless weather manipulation is possible. That's the most significant evidence that it exists.
    In my recent forays into the subject I gather that experiments have been conducted successfully to create rain (dropping dry ice into cold clouds in late 40s) and seems to be done into modern times to stimulate rainfall in arid times (silver iodine rockets fired into the atmosphere in China).

    Some of the theories regarding protective measures to prevent the green house effect are fascinating but again, I cant see if its got past theory stage.

    Its impossible to prove a negative which is why the more outlandish conspiracies gain traction, how can you prove the government isn't trying to poison you through contrails if the simplest explanation isn't good enough to satisfy you?
    Eat. Sleep. Rave. Repeat.
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  2. #1202  
    Coach791 is offline First team regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    34,742
    Quote Originally Posted by Eloader View Post
    In my recent forays into the subject I gather that experiments have been conducted successfully to create rain (dropping dry ice into cold clouds in late 40s) and seems to be done into modern times to stimulate rainfall in arid times (silver iodine rockets fired into the atmosphere in China).

    Some of the theories regarding protective measures to prevent the green house effect are fascinating but again, I cant see if its got past theory stage.

    Its impossible to prove a negative which is why the more outlandish conspiracies gain traction, how can you prove the government isn't trying to poison you through contrails if the simplest explanation isn't good enough to satisfy you?
    That's true. It is also true the military have technology far in advance of what we know. The truth is we don't know. It's possible but we can't prove. However if you have an international treaty in 1977 signing to never use this technology for war that's a sign it is there.

    I don't see treaty's for tractor beams or cloaking devices or other significant ideas that 'could' be imagined. That's because that would be ridiculous. However they must have believed this technology exists or was possible. What I believe is if the military believe something is possible and would give them power and control they'll try and develop it.
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  3. #1203  
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    6,598
    Quote Originally Posted by Coach791 View Post
    That's true. It is also true the military have technology far in advance of what we know. The truth is we don't know. It's possible but we can't prove. However if you have an international treaty in 1977 signing to never use this technology for war that's a sign it is there.

    I don't see treaty's for tractor beams or cloaking devices or other significant ideas that 'could' be imagined. That's because that would be ridiculous. However they must have believed this technology exists or was possible. What I believe is if the military believe something is possible and would give them power and control they'll try and develop it.
    Oh it definitely exists, there are numerous studies produced rain from the 40s onwards and you can see why the treaty exists when Russia seeded clouds to drop radioactive rainfall onto Finland avoiding it dropping on Russia (which it did anyway showing its not reliable) or China being accused of "stealing" rain by seeding clouds to drop rain onto arid regions depriving areas further down the line. Imagine seeding clouds to create a drought in a foreign country as part of a war strategy? I can imagine that all too well and the reasons for the treaty existing become clear.

    BTW, I read the above a couple of hours ago and I've been trying to get a project out so forgive me if the detail is slightly skewed.
    Eat. Sleep. Rave. Repeat.
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  4. #1204  
    Coach791 is offline First team regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    34,742
    Quote Originally Posted by Eloader View Post
    Oh it definitely exists, there are numerous studies produced rain from the 40s onwards and you can see why the treaty exists when Russia seeded clouds to drop radioactive rainfall onto Finland avoiding it dropping on Russia (which it did anyway showing its not reliable) or China being accused of "stealing" rain by seeding clouds to drop rain onto arid regions depriving areas further down the line. Imagine seeding clouds to create a drought in a foreign country as part of a war strategy? I can imagine that all too well and the reasons for the treaty existing become clear.

    BTW, I read the above a couple of hours ago and I've been trying to get a project out so forgive me if the detail is slightly skewed.
    Nothing to forgive. The one thing I am certain of though 100% certain of is that if this technology exists it will be used against the population. I mean used against us. Used against citizens of the U.S. I'm sure if weather can be manipulated to remove people from valuable land with floods or droughts it will happen.

    I'm not saying that''s the reason for the floods in the UK. I'm saying it will be used against the population at some point. The enemy of any government is always its own population.
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  5. #1205  
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    11,269
    Quote Originally Posted by Eloader View Post
    I'll make sure to bookmark this comment then when I'm arguing the case of chem trails.

    I'm always open to any proof you have but from what I've read so far, sections of the internet have some pretty outlandish theories when very simple explanations exist.
    Have you seen reflective clouds yet?
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  6. #1206  
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    11,269
    Quote Originally Posted by Coach791 View Post
    I can't speculate about weather modification. There appears to much theory, some plausible but like anything how do you prove secret government schemes exist. However I do believe there is some evidence that can be used in understanding if weather modification exists.

    The Environmental Modification Convention (ENMOD), formally the Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques is an international treaty prohibiting the military or other hostile use of environmental modification techniques having widespread, long-lasting or severe effects. It opened for signature on 18 May 1977 in Geneva and entered into force on 5 October 1978.

    This convention bans weather warfare. You don't have a global convention to come together and agree not to use weather manipulation for war purposes unless weather manipulation is possible. That's the most significant evidence that it exists.
    Not to mention California has a state budget for it apparently.

    It isn't even in question I don't believe anymore, it exists, the only thing to question is the extent.

    As for poisoning the populous, wouldn't it be easier to contaminate the water?
    Last edited by rhoscoch; 28-6-17 at 15:35.
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  7. #1207  
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    15,348
    Quote Originally Posted by rhoscoch View Post
    Not to mention California has a state budget for it apparently.

    It isn't even in question I don't believe anymore, it exists, the only thing to question is the extent.

    As for poisoning the populous, wouldn't it be easier to contaminate the water?
    Already did it with food
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  8. #1208  
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    3,233
    Quote Originally Posted by Anubis View Post
    Already did it with food
    Macdonalds?
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  9. #1209  
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    3,233
    Quote Originally Posted by I'mCushtyLa View Post
    Were people being serious about this.....I thought it was just a bit of jesting??
    Strap in - they are deadly serious.
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  10. #1210  
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    11,269
    Quote Originally Posted by dantesshadow View Post
    macdonalds?
    gmo?
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  11. #1211  
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    6,598
    Historically, I don't think its very precise a technology at present with the emphasis not on creating rain out of nothing (studies ongoing in Australia) but allowing rain to drop earlier in its cycle (Imagine if they can retain it instead of dropping rain, drought ridden countries could be helped out of what is quite a destructive natural cycle).

    EDIT Sorry, that's a response to Coach's note above about driving people out of an area.
    Last edited by Eloader; 28-6-17 at 16:36.
    Eat. Sleep. Rave. Repeat.
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  12. #1212  
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    6,598
    Quote Originally Posted by rhoscoch View Post
    Have you seen reflective clouds yet?
    Is that the theory for lessening the effect of global warming?
    Eat. Sleep. Rave. Repeat.
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  13. #1213  
    Coach791 is offline First team regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    34,742
    Quote Originally Posted by Eloader View Post
    Historically, I don't think its very precise a technology at present with the emphasis not on creating rain out of nothing (studies ongoing in Australia) but allowing rain to drop earlier in its cycle (Imagine if they can retain it instead of dropping rain, drought ridden countries could be helped out of what is quite a destructive natural cycle).
    I have no idea where the technology is at physically or technically. We have a problem though where governments work in secret so there is no oversight. We cannot oppose what we don't know. That's quite worrying when you consider the views of some of our leaders and/or parties.
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  14. #1214  
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    6,598
    Quote Originally Posted by rhoscoch View Post
    Not to mention California has a state budget for it apparently.

    It isn't even in question I don't believe anymore, it exists, the only thing to question is the extent.

    As for poisoning the populous, wouldn't it be easier to contaminate the water?
    With Fluoride?

    The technology exists and is well documented. Looks very hit and miss at the moment with not a great deal of control in targeting specific areas as well as only able to "overload" existing clouds rather than create.

    I'm off for the day but I'll catch up with this tomorrow. Have a good one.
    Last edited by Eloader; 28-6-17 at 16:41.
    Eat. Sleep. Rave. Repeat.
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  15. #1215  
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    15,348
    Quote Originally Posted by DantesShadow View Post
    Macdonalds?
    E additives.
    And with all the preservatives our body will probably be naturally mummified after death
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  16. #1216  
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    234
    if it keeps on going round the sun on the same axis, i'm happy
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  17. #1217  
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,622
    Quote Originally Posted by rhoscoch View Post
    Not to mention California has a state budget for it apparently.

    It isn't even in question I don't believe anymore, it exists, the only thing to question is the extent.

    As for poisoning the populous, wouldn't it be easier to contaminate the water?
    They do contaminate the water, and toothpaste with sodium flouride, known to calcify the pinneal gland, google it.

    http://thyroidnation.com/pineal-gland-thyroid-fluoride/
    Last edited by FullThrottle; 28-6-17 at 19:05.
    We won't conquer the world, just the ball, every ******* time.
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  18. #1218  
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,622
    We won't conquer the world, just the ball, every ******* time.
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  19. #1219  
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    3,233
    Quote Originally Posted by Anubis View Post
    E additives.
    And with all the preservatives our body will probably be naturally mummified after death
    Can you imagine grave robbers in the future - baffled by the remains of silicone **** and botox fillers etc etc. Maybe electronic circuitry soon too!

    That's their problem.
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  20. #1220  
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    3,233
    This article on UK adoption troubled me. I think skin colour should be irrelevant when placing children or at least not a barrier and a secondary consideration. Surely a loving family is better than continued care?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-4042...of-segregation
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  21. #1221  
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    15,348
    Quote Originally Posted by DantesShadow View Post
    Can you imagine grave robbers in the future - baffled by the remains of silicone **** and botox fillers etc etc. Maybe electronic circuitry soon too!

    That's their problem.
    Could be that in the future there would be a black market for second hand implants.

    Btw
    http://edition.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/08...ml?iref=nextin
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  22. #1222  
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    32,022
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  23. #1223  
    dreams-come-true is online now First team regular
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    37,982
    Sebastiao Salgado ... Workers ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r812dWTTBAU
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  24. #1224  
    dreams-come-true is online now First team regular
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    37,982
    What sort of world are we going to leave for Keith Richards?
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  25. #1225  
    dreams-come-true is online now First team regular
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    37,982
    Here's a hot topic ... overpopulation ... The UN's Agenda 21

    Hmmmmm ... The "cleverest" species to have walked this planet not willing to try to raise standards and educate the population. Humanity has "given up" in the eyes of those who are in charge. The sheep need to be slaughtered. I find this unsurprising but a very wrong road to go down. Because I am much more positive about human nature than the "leaders" of the world have been able to even try to think about. Or are prepared to admit. Clumsy sentence structure.
    .
    The problem of overpopulation may look insurmountable, but there are and should be peaceful and co-operative ways of bringing over a message and actions required without trying to kill people off witthout them "knowing" about it.

    Hasty decision-making without enough positive thinking or co-operative behaviour will lead to situations like this and bad decisions being made for humanity.

    http://www.whydontyoutrythis.com/201...year-2030.html
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  26. #1226  
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    17,478
    So after a spate of attacks the government are looking at extending the offensive weapons to include corrosive substances.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40621303

    Quote Originally Posted by DantesShadow View Post
    This article on UK adoption troubled me. I think skin colour should be irrelevant when placing children or at least not a barrier and a secondary consideration. Surely a loving family is better than continued care?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-4042...of-segregation
    I agree that any family is better than no family but can also see it from the Adoption Agency's Point of View.

    Due to would it be fair on the child if they were in a home where the child has a different religious upbringing to the adoptive parents especially when there are elements that are contradictory e.g. dietary considerations or based on aspects of the child and both adoptive parents the child may have to answer difficult questions to acquaintances. E.g. race

    Now it shouldn't be a reason to prohibit the adoption but it should definitely be a consideration.
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   

  27. #1227  
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    26,211
    Quote Originally Posted by paul143 View Post
    So after a spate of attacks the government are looking at extending the offensive weapons to include corrosive substances.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40621303



    I agree that any family is better than no family but can also see it from the Adoption Agency's Point of View.

    Due to would it be fair on the child if they were in a home where the child has a different religious upbringing to the adoptive parents especially when there are elements that are contradictory e.g. dietary considerations or based on aspects of the child and both adoptive parents the child may have to answer difficult questions to acquaintances. E.g. race

    Now it shouldn't be a reason to prohibit the adoption but it should definitely be a consideration.
    Glad to see something is happening about the corrosive substances

    On the adoption upbringing
    In todays world I can see the worry in taking kids outside their cultural background

    The world has gone crazy - nationalism or globalisation - good parenting or crap parenting - religious nutjobs or humanitarian
    The boxes and choices are frightening
    and the lack of empathy and increase in abuse is a worry
    Reply With Quote   Quick reply to this message   Report Post   



Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •