The Bogus "Doing It for the Money" Argument

a reply to: ConnectDots
Since you show no willingness to discuss any of this with us, I'll leave you to your blogging for now. In the meantime, listen closely to Buckmann's nonsense and see if you can figure out why it's laughable.

a reply to: ConnectDots

And he's just making it up as he goes along. There is no such thing, has never been such a thing, and never will be such a thing as a "KC-434".

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: ConnectDots

And he's just making it up as he goes along. There is no such thing, has never been such thing, and never will be such thing as a "KC-434".

You just don't understand numerology. See KC-135 made in the year 1995, (1995-1696) is exactly a KC 434.
1696 being the number of little people who tried out for the cast of The Wizard of OZ. (as if I even needed to explain that.)

Just wondering out loud here, but isn't posting in the way the OP is, while refusing to engage with other members in discussion of any of the posts he makes, basically spamming?

At the rate they're going, the KC-434 Should be the USAF tanker in the year 3015. They're spraying us from the next millennium!!

a reply to: waynos

That would be extremely depressing considering they look exactly the same as aircraft made today.

a reply to: Zaphod58
Obviously the chemtankers from the future are cloaked to appear like today's version so as to not arouse suspicion. In the future, Titor will confirm this, back in 2005.

originally posted by: DenyObfuscation
a reply to: ConnectDots
Since you show no willingness to discuss any of this with us, I'll leave you to your blogging for now. In the meantime, listen closely to Buckmann's nonsense and see if you can figure out why it's laughable.

I think Mr. Wiggington....I mean Connect the Dots is having a private conversation.

a reply to: DenyObfuscation

Using their Apple IIC based cloaking devices.

originally posted by: waynos
Just wondering out loud here, but isn't posting in the way the OP is, while refusing to engage with other members in discussion of any of the posts he makes, basically spamming?

Yeah at this point we're reduced to the "just pointing and laughing" stage since the poster is clearly unable/unwilling to discuss anything.

a reply to: mrthumpy

Nothing else we can do, when faced with such a stone wall of idiocy. I have a theory that posters who refuse to engage have no opinion of their own they can defend, they are just parroting what somebody else tells them.

is there an echo in here? (dp)

originally posted by: waynos
a reply to: mrthumpy

Nothing else we can do, when faced with such a stone wall of idiocy. I have a theory that posters who refuse to engage have no opinion of their own they can defend, they are just parroting what somebody else tells them.

But with passion which makes it more truthier. Like politicians, ad men and used car salesmen

The reality of the corporate-controlled world we live in is clearly delineated in this fifty minute presentation by Dane Wigington of Geoengineering Watch:

originally posted by: ConnectDots
The reality of the corporate-controlled world we live in is clearly delineated in this fifty minute presentation by Dane Wigington of Geoengineering Watch:

But, Dane Wiggington is a giant tool. Nothing he says can be trusted. Please don't peddle anymore of his lies here. If fools really want to be fooled, they can go to his money factory. (his web site)

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: ConnectDots
The reality of the corporate-controlled world we live in is clearly delineated in this fifty minute presentation by Dane Wigington of Geoengineering Watch:

But, Dane Wiggington is a giant tool. Nothing he says can be trusted. Please don't peddle anymore of his lies here. If fools really want to be fooled, they can go to his money factory. (his web site)

And don't forget to click the Donate button while you're there

originally posted by: ConnectDots

At 22:47 the subject of “climate change” comes up. The point is made that the term was introduced in 1998, when the geoengineering programs were totally unleashed, and a term was needed to explain away radical swings in weather.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

The terminology the public has been groping with for decades has a beginning in the year 1972, when the book The Limits to Growth was published.

Researcher Alan Watt points out in his radio presentation “Cutting Through the Matrix” that the whole idea of global warming was a trumped up excuse to blame humans so that depopulation, which was what the elite, as represented by the Club of Rome, wanted, could be justified.

Quote:

Hi folks, I’m back Cutting Through The Matrix, reading an article from the Club of Rome. Now, the Club of Rome, as I say, is a premier think tank for the United Nations and they also advise, advise government. In other words, they TELL them, they give them their marching orders really, because they work for the big boys who own the world. And remember the books they’ve put out in the past, The Limits to Growth and all the rest of it? They actually admitted that IN THE 1970S THEY WERE GIVEN THE JOB TO FIND SOME WAY TO CONTROL EVERYONE AND EVERY NATION AND BRING THE WORLD TOGETHER GLOBALLY. SO THEY HIT UPON THE IDEA OF GLOBAL WARMING AND FAMINE AND DROUGHTS AND STARVATION, AND THAT WOULD FIT THE BILL. That’s what they said, THAT WOULD FIT THE BILL. It was just dreamed up by them, a very important think tank. . . .

Cutting Through the Matrix [See December 19, 2011 Transcript]

As I recall, man-made global warming morphed to global warming, which again morphed to climate change.

But regardless of the term in vogue, the underlying truth remains the same: It is a pretext.

originally posted by: ConnectDots

originally posted by: ConnectDots

At 22:47 the subject of “climate change” comes up. The point is made that the term was introduced in 1998, when the geoengineering programs were totally unleashed, and a term was needed to explain away radical swings in weather.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was created in 1988

a reply to: mrthumpy

1. The establishment date of a panel and the popularization of terminology in the mainstream media are two entirely different things.
   
   
2. The powers that be plan long term.
   
   
3. The IPCC stated in 2013 that chemtrails are necessary: www.geoengineeringwatch.org...

originally posted by: ConnectDots
a reply to: mrthumpy

1. The establishment date of a panel and the popularization of terminology in the mainstream media are two entirely different things.
   
   
2. The powers that be plan long term.
   
   
3. The IPCC stated in 2013 that chemtrails are necessary: www.geoengineeringwatch.org...
   
   
   

Did they? How do you know? You only linked to geoengineeringwatch and we all know that Dane will tell you anything for a buck.