It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Geoengineering Trials Get Under Way

page: 6
25
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 08:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 

Hindsight is always 20/20, Einstein comes to mind and how his work was misguided by individuals w/ alernate ideas of how it could be used.

This gives me the same feeling and without complete regulation on who gets the technology and how it will be used it is not going to be in the best interest of this planet.




posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 08:54 PM
link   
reply to post by burntheships
 


Right you are and I was thinking it strange no one else in this thread had brought up what the future plans were for using dangerous toxic mixes in the future if the water proved to work, which it will.

This reminds me of the cloud seeding issue which did not work out either. Face it the people and corporations in the position to use this technology are not ready to have it.

In the future yes, but not yet. We are not capable of even protecting humanity, the environment and animal kingdoms, why start playing with something which could eventually help control our biosphere now when it will only lead to disaster?



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 09:06 PM
link   
reply to post by antar
 

I'm not sure what you mean about cloud seeding not working out.
www.weathermodification.com...
wtwma.com...

I'm not sure what comparison you're trying to make. Geoengineering is a completely different matter. Cloud seeding is localized, individual clouds are treated. Geoengineering would be, by necessity, a global effort.



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 09:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
Geoengineering would be, by necessity, a global effort.


Ah, exactly. Then why do you contend that the 747's as previously discussed as being
the cheapest, most effective way to deliver aerosols globally are being avoided for now?

Or, if in your mind they are not out of the picture, why do you avoid every mention of them?



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 09:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by antar
reply to post by burntheships
 


Right you are and I was thinking it strange no one else in this thread had brought up what the future plans were for using dangerous toxic mixes in the future if the water proved to work, which it will.


Well then - why don't you tell them that it will & they can avoid having to have this trial - you should charge them a small % of what they're going to spend as a fee for saving them all that money......it could still be quite a lot - set yourself up for life as a futurist or somethign like that.




posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 09:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Originally posted by antar
reply to post by burntheships
 


Right you are and I was thinking it strange no one else in this thread had brought up what the future plans were for using dangerous toxic mixes in the future if the water proved to work, which it will.


Well then - why don't you tell them that it will & they can avoid having to have this trial - you should charge them a small % of what they're going to spend as a fee for saving them all that money......it could still be quite a lot - set yourself up for life as a futurist or somethign like that.


Heh, A the gaul, your too funny.
Why dont you volunteer?



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 09:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by burntheships

Originally posted by Phage
Geoengineering would be, by necessity, a global effort.


Ah, exactly. Then why do you contend that the 747's as previously discussed as being
the cheapest, most effective way to deliver aerosols globally are being avoided for now?


What do you mean by "being avoided"??


They are mentioned as one of a number of possible means of dispersing aerosols - a scheme which itself is under considerable discussion as to whether it is a good idea in the first place.

What part of that do you consider "being avoided"??

It seems to me that you haev a real problem with eth discussion of possibilities - as soon as someone says well you could do it liek this, or like that, you immediately leap to the conclusion that it is definitely going to be done in that manner.

Do you understand what it means to study something to try to understand better how it works, what the effects are, what might go wrong, whether it is worth proceeding with??
edit on 13-9-2011 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 09:23 PM
link   
reply to post by burntheships
 


Because clearly you are the person with this knowledge - I certainly don't have it so why would they bother paying me??



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 09:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


Ah, I see so if I reply to Phage, you answer.
And, if you reply to Antar, you really are talking to me?

Ummmm.....thats kind of above my pay grade.



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 09:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by burntheships

Ah, exactly. Then why do you contend that the 747's as previously discussed as being
the cheapest, most effective way to deliver aerosols globally are being avoided for now?

Or, if in your mind they are not out of the picture, why do you avoid every mention of them?

If I "avoid every mention" of 747s, how could I contend they are being "avoided for now?"

The Aurora feasibility study does mentions 747 class aircraft but that's just for the purpose of cost estimating. As the study says:

This study does not examine effectiveness or risks of injecting material into the stratosphere for SRM. Its goal is simply to compare a range of delivery systems on a single cost basis.

people.ucalgary.ca...
The study actually concludes that for cost effectiveness, it would cost less to design and build a whole new class of aircraft if the operations were to be carried out at the altitudes which the 747 is capable of. For even higher altitudes, they like the idea of airships. So it seems as far as they are concerned, 747s are out of the picture.
edit on 9/13/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 09:45 PM
link   
reply to post by burntheships
 


I don't believe I actually answered your question - I asked you what it meant by part of it.

But of course this is a public forum - anyone is free to answer or ask any question they like (within the T&C's) - if you want to have a private chat with Phage then you need to make it U2U.

Lots of chemmies like to take exception to other people answering questions othe than the person they think they are having a wee chat with. It is very strange that people who keep saying they are after the truth dislike it when someone points out to them and all they can complain about is they didn't ask the question of that particular person......


And since you are so hot on who answers your questions, perhaps now would be a good time to ask when are you going to answer my question about whether you think all the study of climate change is finished??



edit on 13-9-2011 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 10:00 PM
link   




Wee chat with? Chemmies?


Seems you have lost sight of the OP. Here, lets go back to the beginning.




edit on 13-9-2011 by burntheships because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 10:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


what is a chemmie? wait a minute! are you using a nickname shortening of a word in a derogatory manner towards another member?! if so, weird.....i was under the impression that was frowned upon.



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 10:43 PM
link   
reply to post by burntheships
 


Shhh...

Next they start insinuating you are "paranoid delusional" or some other name for believing in chemtrails (properly called geoengineering).... it's Standard Operating Procedure... if you can't be yelled down... paint you with the crazy stick you "Chimmey" you...

Or start posting pictures insulting you...


The CFR is pushing geoengineering in the light of day... no conspiracy... yet we are the crazy ones!

I mean, how DARE we be conspiratorial and back it up with facts... on a conspiracy website!

I'm a lot more confident they are implementing geoengineering than there are any little green guys flying around in saucers.... yet we get called chimmeys and paranoid delusional?

And why pretend to ban it on one hand, change to the bland term "adaptation" (which won't show up on search engines like geoengineering will), and continue the planning????

It is crazy making... which is a known psychological technique for control.

And our military plans to have this down to routine by 2025:
Air Force paper Owning the weather in 2025 - Military Applications of Weather Modification (also here)

Introduction - Page 1 - Page 2 - Page 3 - Page 4 - Page 5 - Appendix

Now we no part of the mission of the secretive new UAV shuttle that the air force has recently launched:

In 2025, uninhabited aerospace vehicles (UAV) are routinely used for weather-modification operations.



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 10:49 PM
link   
reply to post by optimus primal
 


Chemmie and debunker are commonly used shorthand for people who believe in the chemtrail "theory", and people who don't.

BTS thanks for the reminder, but it is not really necessary - I remember the OP quite well.

You seem to have forgotten that thsi is an experiment - you ar eranting on as if sulphate spraying were already happening, or it was the only strategy being considered to counter climate warming.

A lot of things are being investigated to combat climate change of anthropomorphic global warming or whatever it is you want to call it.

Thank you for brining this to "our" attention - you were a little late of course - it's been on the chemtrail/geoengineering board for a few days before you got it here under "breaking news" - www.abovetopsecret.com... - but that's OK - you're allowed to have something on "Breaking news" and the "specialist" board.

Shame you have to keep insisting that it is definitely going to do this, or that, or 747's are definitely going to be used to spray, etc. and so screw up a perfectly good story. But I suppose you hadn't bothered with all that imaginiative rhetoric I suppose you wouldn't have gotten as many stars and flags



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 10:56 PM
link   
reply to post by pianopraze
 

The CFR is pushing geoengineering? Really? Why is that the briefing notes say this?

This workshop will focus on the question of strategies for constraining and shaping
geoengineering. We will explore formal, legal strategies as well as informal efforts to
create norms that could govern testing and deployment of geoengineering systems and
their possible undesirable consequences. We will probe whether it is possible to limit the
use of geoengineering to circumstances of collective action by the international
community in the face of true global emergencies and what might happen when there are
disputes over when the emergency “trigger” should be pulled.

www.cfr.org...
It sounds more like they're pushing for restraint. To encourage multilateral agreement before anything is done.

There is not one word about geoengineering techniques in WEATHER AS A FORCE MULTIPLIER: OWNING THE WEATHER IN 2025, MILITARY APPLICATIONS OF WEATHER MODIFICATION Notice the phrase "weather modification?" That's cloud seeding. The phrase you took nicely out of context comes from the introduction which starts:

Scenario: Imagine that in 2025 the US is fighting a rich, but now consolidated, politically powerful drug cartel in South America. The cartel has purchased hundreds of Russian-and Chinese-built fighters that have successfully thwarted our attempts to attack their production facilities. With their local numerical superiority and interior lines, the cartel is launching more than 10 aircraft for every one of ours.

It's imaginary. Speculation. Not real. Of course, you also avoided quoting this:

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.

csat.au.af.mil...
And again, it has nothing to do with geoengineering. It concerns the potential use of weather modification in a battlefield environment. Making it rain on the enemy. Not change the global climate.

Thanks for reminding me of that picture. Of course, it wasn't an insult. It was in reply to someone who said that you don't need to use your brain. You don't need to use reason. See, it's funny because the scarecrow didn't have a brain.

But what does that have to do with testing a balloon?

edit on 9/14/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 11:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by pianopraze

And why pretend to ban it on one hand, change to the bland term "adaptation" (which won't show up on search engines like geoengineering will),


Oh dear PP - why do you make such an outright lie??


Adaption is not an alternative term for geo-engineering at all - it is:


Adaptation to the adverse effects of climate change is vital in order to reduce the impacts of climate change that are happening now and increase resilience to future impacts.


ie it is learnign to live with whatever effects climate change might bring about.

It is somethign we are al going to have to do if the climate does change - and why would you thnk it is bad? why would you construct an elaborate lie about it??



and continue the planning????


So you think no-one should bother planning how they might cope with climate change??

Why wouldn't you plan for changes you think are going to happen?? It seems the height of stupidity to me to know that the climate is changing....and then refuse to take any account of it.

Whether humanity is causing climate change or not is actually completely irrelevant to that!

Do you also suggest hat people do not plan for earthquakes, fires and floods??


As for the rest of your post.....welll I encourage anyone to go read all of the ATS threads you posted to - every one of your so called proofs that chemtrails exist, or geo-engineering is being carried, or whatever else out have been debunked from here to kingdom come.


I haven't copied your whole post - you've done a superb job linking to debunking resources



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 11:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


The lie is in pretending they aren't pushing these things under the term "adaptation"... its a word that is much easier for google to hide on their search engine, but is the same diatribe repackaged with the added bonus that you can pretend what you just stated.

Amazing when you read The Whitehouse Book on Adaptation it picks right up geoengineering left off... now that people are becoming aware of the word geoengineering they are pulling the classic nut shell game and hiding their actions.

Oh, and while they are at it they are using it increase government control at a local level to implement thier international globalist control:

Make adaptation a standard part of Agency planning to ensure that resources are invested wisely and services and operations remain effective in a changing climate.
Ensure scientific information about the impacts of climate change is easily accessible so public and private sector decision-makers can build adaptive capacity into their plans and activities.
Align Federal efforts to respond to climate impacts that cut across jurisdictions and missions, such as those that threaten water resources, public health, oceans and coasts, and communities.
Develop a U.S. strategy to support international adaptation that leverages resources across the Federal Governmentto help developing countries reduce their vulnerability to climate change through programs that are consistent with the core principles and objectives of the President’s new Global Development Policy.
Build strong partnerships to support local, state, and tribal decision makers in improving management of places and infrastructure most likely to be affected by climate change.

2nd whitehouse.gov source link

spin spin spin...

Oh should i mention agenda 21 here? Seems relevant.... ps that's UN agenda 21...


People label us as conspiracy theorists as TPTB push forward agendas like this in broad daylight. They announce it to the press and make videos of it. But if we say it we are conspiracy nuts? The cognitive dissonance is overwhelming!

There are many plans for each region of the country. Jessie Venture highlighted their plan to force evacuate the gulf coast:

These globalists are not your friend... or the friends of those who work for them!

Global Warming is just another farce to push their globalist agendas like Agenda 21.

Thank God for sites like ATS where you can still come and learn what is going on!



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 11:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by pianopraze
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


The lie is in pretending they aren't pushing these things under the term "adaptation"... its a word that is much easier for google to hide on their search engine, but is the same diatribe repackaged with the added bonus that you can pretend what you just stated.

Amazing when you read The Whitehouse Book on Adaptation it picks right up geoengineering left off...


and where is that??


Here's the 1st para of the executive summary:


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
As concentrations of greenhouse gases and heat-trapping particles increase in the atmosphere, it is
becoming ever more urgent to understand and prepare for the resulting changes in climate. These
changes include not only temperature increases but also shifts in precipitation patterns, storm tracks, and
other parameters. Climate change affects human health, water and energy supplies, food production,
coastal communities, ecosystems, and many other aspects of society and the environment. The Obama
Administration is committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions to minimize the impacts of climate
change. But mitigation alone is not enough. People are already feeling the impacts of climate change and
future changes are inevitable. To prepare and respond to these impacts, the Administration is also
committed to climate change adaptation.


so again adaption is learning to live with the effects of climate change - regardless of how it is caused or whether any geo-engineering is going on.

Certainly it mentions that there is "mitigation" of climate change - but it notes that is "not enough" - climat change is happening anyway.

And the mitigation mentioned is reducing greenhouse gasses.

You REALLY have it in for "adaption" - but you are just completely wrong saying that it is some sort of cover-word for geo-engineering.

You even highlight another section of the report that further shows how wrong yuo are:


Oh, and while they are at it they are using it increase government control at a local level to implement thier international globalist control:


Make adaptation a standard part of Agency planning to ensure that resources are invested wisely and services and operations remain effective in a changing climate.


-so making sure that government services and operations still work despteu the effects of climate change.........what is the problem with that??



Ensure scientific information about the impacts of climate change is easily accessible so public and private sector decision-makers can build adaptive capacity into their plans and activities.


Make sure everyone - private and public - has as much accurate inforamtion as possible so they can make appropriate decisions.

Are you seriously suggesting that the government should HIDE this information?? Isn't hiding information one of the things you are railing against??



Align Federal efforts to respond to climate impacts that cut across jurisdictions and missions, such as those that threaten water resources, public health, oceans and coasts, and communities.


Are you really against Federal resources being able to help preserve water, publich health, etc??




Develop a U.S. strategy to support international adaptation that leverages resources across the Federal Government to help developing countries reduce their vulnerability to climate change through programs that are consistent with the core principles and objectives of the President’s new Global Development Policy.


Help others cope with the effects of climate change - yep - sure sounds evil to me!




Build strong partnerships to support local, state, and tribal decision makers in improving management of places and infrastructure most likely to be affected by climate change.


Why shouldn't the government help people cope with the effects of climate change????



edit on 13-9-2011 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 01:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 



Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul


A lot of things are being investigated to combat climate change of anthropomorphic global warming or whatever it is you want to call it.


I cant help ya there OTG, your a seasoned ATSer, either your studied up on Geoengineering or
your not. And by your own admission, you dont really give a hoot.

So...I leave you with my sense of satisfaction. Very satisfied on a scale of 1 to 10

Ten being the most satisfied. 10.
edit on 14-9-2011 by burntheships because: Cluck Cluck




top topics



 
25
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join