Weather Wars

Anyone?

Initially, it sounds like a lot of bunk to me , but who knows what groups are screwing around with whatever without pubic knowledge? :blink:

If weather can be controlled, even to a small degreee, they should work to start re-solidifying the polar ice packs before we all drown-

Check this out...

Utter garbage. Do you have any comprehension on the type of math required to solve (predict) weather patterns? Some of the differential equations are so complex they can't be solved even by computers. Weather is predicted by simplifying these equations, which makes them unpredictable after just a few days. And you think we can control it?! Not a chance.

I give this theory a 0/10.

Hmmm... I started reading Bearden's 60+ pg document, which Sthephen's only breifly quotes in his blog. While controlling hurricanes or setting off a psunami is a bit of a stretch IMO, the realities of EM influence on an etherial atmosphere I am aware of, though I'm a bit fuzzy (physics-wise) of his 'energy from a vacuum' principle. His theories on EM influence on the human immune system are also somewhat beyond me, however negative effects on pacemaker wearers and pulmonary sufferers are well documented.

Bearden's document proposes use of this EM technology in asymetical warfare, which is totally conceivable. I must admit, it reads somewhat like a Richard C. Clarke book. While initially sounding almost like science-fiction, you quickly realize this isn't total bullshit, which sits you back in your chair and makes you think... :blink:

Getting back to weather, meteoroligists have gained enough data to at least suggest our planet goes through cyclic changes over the eons. While preliminary, the data also suggests this cyclic graph is becoming skewed. Whether this is due to man-made causes is a topic for debate, though one could presume it's possible. And whether these suggested causes are accidental or deliberate- is another matter entirely. Again, reading Bearden's document- the plausibility seems to exist.

But consider this: When the Manhattan Project devloped the first atomic bomb, meteorogical experts didn't know what the impact of such an explosion would have on the atmoshpere. Some thought a chain-reaction would reign "fire in the sky".


They detonated it anyway...

So a group with a 'special electronic device' stopped the Russians, which caused a backlash that somehow blew up Chernobyl? Ha ha ha!

I don't have time for this. I have homework to do.

The cloud seeding "chemtrail" theories seem plausable.

I remember reading about cloud seeding experiments done back in the 60's-70's. Although apparently some degree of alteration was possible, it was concluded it wasn't enough to make any appreciable change given the chemical amounts involved, and I think the project was finally scrapped due to the costs outweighing the benefits. Whether new technologies have renewed the experiments- I know not.

Ducc- The political spews in Bearden's treatise ARE a bit much at times, and even I mused at some of the long-winded statements. However there are a few bits and pieces spread throughout that rather diverse document that I have heard substantiated through other sources.

It is 'possible' that an EM pulse weapon of some kind 'could' have caused the Chernobyl disaster. There's still a cloud of mystery and suspicion surrounding that incident. EM waves can radiate from fusion reactions. Pulses can now be produced electronically. In fact, some modern US defense systems circuitry still use vacuum tubes for that very reason. Semiconductors just cannot survive the event.

I agree the far off conspiracy theories do not hold much water. As for Chernobyl, there was a nuclear physist on the radio the other night who explained what happened:

Apparently the engineers at the plant were testing a new safety system that would have been an improvement on the original. What you have here is ironic, in order for them to actually test it they had to disable numerous backup systems, at which point when the new unit testing began to fail they had no way to recover from it because they had disabled all those numerous backup systems. The initial explosion was supposed to have killed only one plant worker and the rest died later from radiation sickness. Since so many people survived initially they were able to determine what exactly was the cause. The actually fallout and death toll afterward though is still shrowded in secrecy and their have been estimates from thousands to over 100,000. Then again who knows how many who died from cancer was due to the fallout?

Like so many things, there's the 'official story', and what really happened. Whether the two coincide depends on many factors, mostly politically based.

'Far-off' conspiracy theories are both hard to prove and disprove. Face it- if you were working on some 'doomsday device', I doubt you'd post your work (or your intentions) on the front page of the NYT, WP, or the BBC website. :rofl:

Likewise, if one of your experiments goes FUBAR, accepting blame is something that doesn't look good on a resume. It's a lot easier to either cook up some kind of story, or finger-point to the 'other' guy, and let the courts figure out who's going to get sued. Of course, if it happens to be our government- we can bury it under the Pentagon in so much red tape, no one will ever find it. :D

What got me interested in this was I heard the author of this site on the Radio making claims that he had hotgraphic evidence of what looked like holes punched out of storms such as hurricanes when they got near the land as if some man made device induced it. It sure seemed far fetched but he sounded competent when describing and explaining the weather ect...

man i sence the fact that project HAARP will have a major downfall and can harm our atmosphere.