Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

I Have Been Wrong

page: 5
8
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 8 2013 @ 04:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by OratoryHeist

However, from the info you provided, cirrus clouds can change into stratus clouds if a warm front is approaching.


that's not what it says as far as I can see.

cirrus clouds do not "change" into anything.

A warm front comes along and makes stratus at appropriate conditions, which may also see het cirrus disappear because conditions are no longer right for it - but that is not "cirrus changing into stratus"


And I'll ask again, can you provide some evidence that clearly states 'cirrus clouds are too high and thin to be seeded'?


nothing is too high or thin to be seeded - you can seed clear air if you want, or oceans, or flatulence.....

Just don't' expect to get any actual rain from it!!




posted on Aug, 8 2013 @ 05:40 PM
link   
Wow. Page 5 already. For a post just covering my butt for the sure-to-come calls: "But NASA said "chemtrails", "but here is a video of a contrail turning on", and "but if you put barium in a flame it turns green, so you really can tell a chemical with your eyes."

Those who persist in claiming cloud-seeding is geo-engineering is chemtrails, are still wrong.

First, because chemtrails do not exist. It's an internet myth, perpetuated by people who are paid fairly well for promoting their existence through $ales of video$, book$, and personal appearances. There is no physical, factual, empirical, or spiritual proof of chemtrails. I now include spiritual because believers, like sheep, follow their shepherds without thinking for themselves.

Second, geo-engineering is about CLIMATE, cloud-seeding to get rain is about immediate weather. If you don't know the difference, and apparently you do not, learn it. It's vital for you to continue to question GE and the proposals being researched and discussed. I say "to get rain", because cloud-seeding to possibly make clouds and increase the albedo is a proposed plan of GE, but it uses boats for the spraying of seawater and is not related to the cloud seeding as is done today. And has been tried throughout the entire history of mankind being annoyed by dry weather.

Third, the believers need to take a breath and really read some of the geo-engineering reports out there. Use a dictionary if needed. There is no program in operation, and there won't be until all the aspects of the plan can be decided. This includes legal, physical, political, economic, geographic, scientific, and ethical considerations. No one knows who, what, where, when, how, why or IF GE will ever be done, beyond the easy things like white roofs, emission reductions, and all the other good ideas that everyone agrees upon.

Talking about it is one thing, understand it is better, but worrying about it is really just pointless. Being paranoid about it.....well, that's just dumb. It's like worrying that Nibiru is going to hit our planet, or that the second sun is going to... what? explode?.., or the monster under your bed is going to eat your toes while you sleep. There is no proof whatsoever. DEAL.



posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 12:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Originally posted by OratoryHeist

However, from the info you provided, cirrus clouds can change into stratus clouds if a warm front is approaching.


that's not what it says as far as I can see.

cirrus clouds do not "change" into anything.

So then Aloysius the Einstein, if cirrus clouds do not 'change' into anything, how come we don't have an atmosphere full of cirrus clouds? If cirrus cloud didnt change, there would be no need for any form of solar radiation management; we'd never be able to see the sun if clouds didnt change!

I suggest you go back and re-read the material that was posted.



posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 01:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by stars15k
Those who persist in claiming cloud-seeding is geo-engineering is chemtrails, are still wrong.

Well, cloud-seeding is a form of geo-engineering. That is a documented fact.

Chemtrails, however, are theory.



First, because chemtrails do not exist. It's an internet myth, perpetuated by people who are paid fairly well for promoting their existence through $ales of video$, book$, and personal appearances. There is no physical, factual, empirical, or spiritual proof of chemtrails. I now include spiritual because believers, like sheep, follow their shepherds without thinking for themselves.

And yet the 'nay-sayers' will only believe something is happening when they have an official document that tells them something is happening (sometimes not even then
.

Looks to me like the 'believers' and the 'nay-sayers' are just two different kinds of sheep; they both need other people to tell them things; they cannot figure it out for themselves.



There is no program in operation, ...

You can make this definitive claim because?



and there won't be until all the aspects of the plan can be decided. This includes legal, physical, political, economic, geographic, scientific, and ethical considerations. No one knows who, what, where, when, how, why or IF GE will ever be done, beyond the easy things like white roofs, emission reductions, and all the other good ideas that everyone agrees upon.

So if you don't do experiments, how do you find out the various considerations?

At some point you are going to have to experiment so that those who make decisions can actually make the decisions. If those experiments result in flooding and destruction of crops, or extended dry spells, or whatever, who pays for any of the negative effects from the experiments?

We all know that various clandestine experiments take place (in the various fields of science) so to completely rule out the possibility that experimenting may well be taking place right now is just plain ignorant.



Talking about it is one thing, understand it is better, ...

Exactly, and what better way to understand that to do some experimentation.



There is no proof whatsoever. DEAL.

I suppose this all depends on what you are willing to accept as proof. Just because the proof you require is not sitting in front of you, does not mean that the proof is not available or that things are not happening.

Take the so called 'Prism' Internet monitoring, apparently that has been going on secretly since 2007. Yet it just comes to light this year.

Whats worth keeping secret more: Internet monitoring or possible environmental damage due to experimentation?

To say 'no its not happening' is equally as stupid as saying 'yes it definitely is happening'.



posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 02:01 PM
link   
reply to post by OratoryHeist
 





Well, cloud-seeding is a form of geo-engineering. That is a documented fact.


Actually what is a documented fact is that geoengineering is based on cloud seeding, not the other way around.


Geoengineering proposals were first developed in the middle of the 20th century. Relying on technologies developed during World War II, such proposals were designed to alter weather systems in order to obtain more favourable climate conditions on a regional scale. One of the best-known techniques is cloud seeding, a process that attempts to bring rain to parched farmland by dispersing particles of silver iodide or solid carbon dioxide into rain-bearing clouds.


www.britannica.com...

Any chance you can provide a link that shows this documented fact?



posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 02:08 PM
link   
reply to post by OratoryHeist
 





At some point you are going to have to experiment so that those who make decisions can actually make the decisions. If those experiments result in flooding and destruction of crops, or extended dry spells, or whatever, who pays for any of the negative effects from the experiments?


And they do, that is what computer models and laboratory experiments are for.

And the biggest reason geoengineering is not happening is because they don't want to risk the chance of doing something that could end very badly with no way to reverse the effects.



posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 04:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by OratoryHeist

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Originally posted by OratoryHeist

However, from the info you provided, cirrus clouds can change into stratus clouds if a warm front is approaching.


that's not what it says as far as I can see.

cirrus clouds do not "change" into anything.

So then Aloysius the Einstein, if cirrus clouds do not 'change' into anything, how come we don't have an atmosphere full of cirrus clouds?


Because they come and they go.

edit on 12-8-2013 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 04:17 PM
link   
Why are you people still trying to "prove" something, on a conspiracy site? Man has the ability to manipulate the weather. That's all we need to know. That's all they want us to know.



posted on Aug, 12 2013 @ 04:32 PM
link   
reply to post by WonderBoi
 


If that's all they want us to know then clearly there is something else to be known so it is NOT all we need to know.








top topics



 
8
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join