Military History Ch. has an interesting Weather War show running

page: 5
18
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join

posted on May, 27 2014 @ 04:38 PM
link   
a reply to: tsurfer2000h
that would be around the time you saw the credible evidence that chemtrails exist.

sadly it is a common tactic for chemtrail believers - once they realize they can't get away with stating stuff as true without justification they have a choice - acknowledge eth lack of evidence, or make it personal.......they invariably seem to choose the later rather than take a rational approach - it seems just too hard to admit they are wrong/have ben deceived!




posted on May, 27 2014 @ 05:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Wrabbit2000




You're misunderstanding what the word fiction means in the context the Air Force officers are using it here though, and the technology, methods or feasibility of what is talked about isn't part of the fiction. That is also very specifically laid out a bit further into the report.


Are you really going to try and tell me that fiction in the Air Force has a different meaning than it does in say science fiction?

Because the last time I checked fiction means the same thing in the military as it does to civilians.

Tell you what you can call it a report all you want, but that doesn't change the fact it is fictional writing and we know what fiction means...


fic·tion noun \ˈfik-shən\
: written stories about people and events that are not real : literature that tells stories which are imagined by the writer

: something that is not true


www.merriam-webster.com...

So now tell me how something that is written about something that isn't real, becomes a report that shows they are using it as a weapon?

That just doesn't make sense.



posted on May, 27 2014 @ 06:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Wrabbit2000




It's not chatting at all. It's defending attacks...and that shouldn't BE something any member at ATS has to do for mere opinions of a controversial topic.


I don't think anybody has attacked you personally, but what was attacked was your so called proof that hasn't really panned out as of yet.

Don't take it personal...It's all about your evidence.



posted on May, 28 2014 @ 05:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: Wrabbit2000
a reply to: network dude


I'm not that sure about how much man did or didn't do in damage to the ionosphere. Some objective research at some point would be good to see, but that will require an open disclosure of what all was done while experimenting with HAARP. How much from the Russian system and what were it's power levels?

The head of the Geo institute in Alaska, in comments on HAARP, plainly described what they were doing in at least part of it but just assured the interviewer that the impact was very very small for area.



This might help you visualise it, the Ionosphere is a pretty dynamic place and I'm pretty sure any 'hole' would be pretty quickly repaired


science1.nasa.gov...



posted on May, 29 2014 @ 06:41 AM
link   
a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Have you ever participated in a military exercise? They use fictional situations for training purposes all the time...its the norm. Now this may be hard for you to understand but they use those Fictional situations because they want you to be accustomed to that scenario when it arises. Doesn't mean it will arise but its better to be safe than sorry.

just saying its fiction isnt enough for me to dismiss the report as something that wont be looked at by the military. As I know the military uses fictional situations all the time.



posted on May, 29 2014 @ 06:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: gnarkill1529
a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Have you ever participated in a military exercise? They use fictional situations for training purposes all the time...its the norm. Now this may be hard for you to understand but they use those Fictional situations because they want you to be accustomed to that scenario when it arises. Doesn't mean it will arise but its better to be safe than sorry.

just saying its fiction isnt enough for me to dismiss the report as something that wont be looked at by the military. As I know the military uses fictional situations all the time.


This was an assignment given to new cadets as part of a science class. If you read the paper, it says that.
Former USAF here. My tech school was almost a year long, so I understand how military training is.



posted on May, 29 2014 @ 06:56 AM
link   
a reply to: gnarkill1529




Have you ever participated in a military exercise? They use fictional situations for training purposes all the time...its the norm.


And again they aren't real hence the name fictional scenarios.

It doesn't matter what context you use the word that does not change the meaning of it.



Now this may be hard for you to understand but they use those Fictional situations because they want you to be accustomed to that scenario when it arises. Doesn't mean it will arise but its better to be safe than sorry.


So, just because they may happen that changes the whole meaning of the word, it isn't hard to understand because unlike the OP I understand what the meaning of fiction is.

Just so you know this has been discussed and debunked more than once here, the OP just doesn't like to be told he is wrong.

BTW this is not a report as the OP would try to make some think. In fact you can read it all right here...

csat.au.af.mil...

But the most telling part of this fictional writing is this right here...


This report contains fictional representations of future situations/scenarios. Any similarities to real people or
events, other than those specifically cited, are unintentional and are for purposes of illustration only


Purposes of illustration only.

Does that in your mind say real?



posted on May, 29 2014 @ 06:57 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

I have a few buddies who were AF and I was always jealous because they got the best stuff. lol...so this was the end of his advanced training school and he was to write a report on exotic weather warfare? I fail to see why they would ask for a fictional report when the objective of end of advanced training testing is to test your knowledge of your MOS. if I understand you correctly you are saying this was a cadet being asked to right a report of a topic of advanced warfare.

Edit: granted I don't have time to read the whole report right now so I could be completely off...hopefully later today and get read some into this
edit on 29-5-2014 by gnarkill1529 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 29 2014 @ 07:05 AM
link   
a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Well In my mind the fictional situations are used in practice for actual similar situations. I have admittedly not read the report and I hope to get into it today but normally, in my experience with the military, fictional situations are used in training to simulate actual situations. I don't see why the same logic cant be applied in the case of this report.

And im not saying anything in the report that is referred to as exotic weather warfare technology is real so don't get the idea that I believe it is, but I do think it is possible that our military is actively studying weather warfare maybe in an attempt to control it someday.
edit on 29-5-2014 by gnarkill1529 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 29 2014 @ 07:06 AM
link   
a reply to: gnarkill1529




Edit: granted I don't have time to read the whole report right now so I could be completely off...hopefully later today and get read some into this


I think your going to find when you read this paper as it isn't a report, that the OP has no clue as to what he is talking about.

Most of us who have been on here awhile discussing this topic have taken the time to read this and understand the difference that some just can't seem to understand.



posted on May, 29 2014 @ 07:08 AM
link   
a reply to: gnarkill1529

This was a class assignment of a bunch of USAF cadets in a science class. The were a bunch of aspiring zero's, so they don't have to learn real stuff, just fluffy things and management.


But seriously, take a look at the whole paper, the beginning especially.
where it says this:

Disclaimer
2025 is a study designed to comply with a directive from the chief of staff of the Air Force to examine the
concepts, capabilities, and technologies the United States will require to remain the dominant air and space
force in the future. Presented on 17 June 1996, this report was produced in the Department of Defense school
environment of academic freedom and in the interest of advancing concepts related to national defense. The
views expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not reflect the official policy or position of the
United States Air Force, Department of Defense, or the United States government.
This report contains fictional representations of future situations/scenarios. Any similarities to real people or
events, other than those specifically cited, are unintentional and are for purposes of illustration only.
This publication has been reviewed by security and policy review authorities, is unclassified, and is cleared
for public release.



posted on May, 29 2014 @ 07:09 AM
link   
a reply to: gnarkill1529




I don't see why the same logic cant be applied in the case of this report.



Well the biggest thing you should understand is that this is not a report and nowhere does it allude to this being a report.

I will say it again...The OP is throwing crap against the wall hoping to see what sticks, and this paper just won't stick.

I am wrong they do in the disclaimer, but it is still a fictional piece of writing.

And because I was wrong about them saying it was a report doesn't mean I am wrong about it not being real.
edit on 29-5-2014 by tsurfer2000h because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 29 2014 @ 07:11 AM
link   
a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Ill check out the stated link before making anymore comment about whats in it



posted on May, 29 2014 @ 07:15 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude




But seriously, take a look at the whole paper, the beginning especially.
where it says this:


But it's all about the bibliography, as that is what I was told tells the whole story.


Or at least that is what the OP thinks.



posted on May, 29 2014 @ 07:17 AM
link   
a reply to: gnarkill1529




Ill check out the stated link before making anymore comment about whats in it



That's all the OP needed to do, but seemingly refuses to do that.

It is an interesting read for sure.

Enjoy the read.



posted on May, 29 2014 @ 01:12 PM
link   
a reply to: gnarkill1529

I appreciate your taking time to look over what's here. After all, it's to a speculative chat and topic I throw my stuff in, not to establish fact or determine the truth. I think the nature of the topic precludes seeing that any time soon for absolutes.

In the mean time, it makes an interesting topic to explore for the blur between what is real, what is suspected and what may be happening in a covert way we're very much intended to accept isn't possible.

Food for thought!



posted on May, 29 2014 @ 04:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: gnarkill1529
a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Well In my mind the fictional situations are used in practice for actual similar situations. I have admittedly not read the report and I hope to get into it today but normally, in my experience with the military, fictional situations are used in training to simulate actual situations. I don't see why the same logic cant be applied in the case of this report.


Because het purpose of the report is to show thinking skills


And im not saying anything in the report that is referred to as exotic weather warfare technology is real so don't get the idea that I believe it is, but I do think it is possible that our military is actively studying weather warfare maybe in an attempt to control it someday.


I'm sure they are and would like to - people would like to be able to do lots of things and study them in an attempt to achieve that goal.

Other people write papers to show they have absorbed the course content, or are capable of writing a coherent paper.

there is nothing in this report that is anything more than a university-level exercise in thinking.





top topics
 
18
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join