Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

How will we know if it's natural weather or weaponized weather warfare?

page: 1
15
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 2 2014 @ 04:13 PM
link   
We will not know. That is the whole point. The absolute beginning and end of weaponized weather is that the target will not know if it is natural or not. Several quotes from an article by James Fleming illustrate this perspective:

The pathological history of weather and climate modification: Three cycles of promise and hype


In a recurring theme, the military points out that weather modification, unlike other approaches, “makes what are otherwise the results of deliberate actions appear to be the consequences of natural weather phenomena.”



In addition to traditional cloud seeding methods, the Air Force visionaries propose computer hacking to disrupt an enemy's weather monitors and models, and using “nanotechnology” to create clouds of microscopic computer particles that could block an enemy's optical sensors or guide smart weapons to their targets; the cost of developing these clouds to be borne by the private sector.


In addition to this perfect weapon status is the always present reason that our enemies or rivals have these weapons and so we must have them too. That reasoning gets funding and priority.

Being prepared, boy scout fashion, is good. Efforts to internationally call a truce have failed. In the end times, our latter day prophets tell us that we will not be able to distinguish between natural and man-made phenomena. Weaponized weather is a perfect example.

If WWIII has already begun, globally, using weaponized weather modification, how would we know? Our prophets tell us that we wouldn't. Our military tells us that we wouldn't.

So that is the point of this thread: how would we know? How could we know? What steps would help us to know? How could we, caught between the cross hairs, as it were, know??!!




posted on Jan, 2 2014 @ 04:16 PM
link   
If it is weaponized weather warfare than they have been testing on us up here in the U.P. for a very long time. You are talking about cold and snow aren't you?



posted on Jan, 2 2014 @ 04:17 PM
link   
reply to post by luxordelphi
 


Yes.

There are an awful lot of people who have spent their lives watching and studying the weather. We would know.



posted on Jan, 2 2014 @ 04:19 PM
link   
reply to post by luxordelphi
 


I was about to give a sarcastic response until I saw the source, a pdf from Colby.edu. I don't generally buy the large scale weather modification and weaponized weather.

Before I comment otherwise in any serious manner, I'll have to read the entire paper and find out the conclusions drawn therein. It looks very interesting.

Thanks for the article. I look forward to reading it.



posted on Jan, 2 2014 @ 04:37 PM
link   

rickymouse
If it is weaponized weather warfare than they have been testing on us up here in the U.P. for a very long time. You are talking about cold and snow aren't you?


Yes, in a sense. Certain aspects of climate change brought on by a geoengineering response to global warming.



posted on Jan, 2 2014 @ 04:38 PM
link   
reply to post by luxordelphi
 

Sadly, youre right about this. Thats what makes this "natural" threat so insideous. We wont see it for what it is when its coming.

Weather is "weather' as Fire is "fire" and Rain is "rain" and hail-"HAIL". In many ways...its the perfect weapon.

Thats why Ive always said not to worry about nukes as the end of all...it could well be a earthwide hurricane, earthquake,1,000 ft tsunami that was man-made.

Another thought...if that did happen... and it was just devastating weather...how would we know who did it?????



posted on Jan, 2 2014 @ 04:41 PM
link   

AndyMayhew
reply to post by luxordelphi
 


Yes.

There are an awful lot of people who have spent their lives watching and studying the weather. We would know.


Who's we? The military would know. How would we, Joe & Jane Public, know? The military has stated that this is the beauty of this weapon - no one would know. Do you think they don't know what they're talking about?



posted on Jan, 2 2014 @ 04:50 PM
link   
When you start witnessing the relocation of major government assets in the area to be effected before it happens. My 2 cents.



posted on Jan, 2 2014 @ 04:52 PM
link   

Brotherman
When you start witnessing the relocation of major government assets in the area to be effected before it happens. My 2 cents.


Your 2 cents are gold.

2nd...



posted on Jan, 2 2014 @ 04:57 PM
link   
reply to post by luxordelphi
 


Also a good indicator might be the build up of "emergency" units in the surrounding areas as well, also as a possibility, under the guise of homeland security you may see on surrounding highways intense searches of trucks bringing in supplies and fuel simply to deter truckers and hold things off to bring massive damages to those in the area targeted. I was taught once before, "Tactics are for amateurs, Logistics are for professionals." Something to think about at the least.



posted on Jan, 2 2014 @ 05:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Brotherman
 


That's an amazing quote...my advice, personal and off-topic: very few are that smart. But...the government supposedly has psychics for logistics or so I read here on ATS.

Your post brings to mind Katrina.



posted on Jan, 2 2014 @ 05:29 PM
link   
reply to post by luxordelphi
 


I can't say for Katrina as I was only speaking hypothetically, that these would be signs I would keep my eye out for under context of the topic. To win all you really have to do is just destroy the opponents will to fight, starve them, and then when they are on their knees bring on your control and no one will object. At that point resistance is an excercise in futility as anyone capable of fighting back A.) would never know they were attacked B.) there would be no ground to stand on if flooded for example C.) You would be to hungry to fight back depending on how long this attack would have been commenced upon. Introduction to extreme heat or cold also have a very demoralizing effect on those trying to survive to add insult to injury is if they made it known help is on the way but they can't quite get to you yet, type of psy. op. If weather was the mode, it would be devastating. Could you imagine a large portion of the Mississippi River frozen feet thick in a key area or tri state highway under 4 foot of water with surrounding cities hit with gale force winds and rain that doesn't stop for days, unexpected? It would be bad if it were to happen.



posted on Jan, 2 2014 @ 06:22 PM
link   
Well what if we look for signs of strange phenomnea after the Weather event. Like maybe the strange lgihts in the sky Over China during their big quake a couple years ago? Maybe that could be a sign of foul play??



posted on Jan, 2 2014 @ 08:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Brotherman
 


For sure and especially this that you said:




Introduction to extreme heat or cold also have a very demoralizing effect on those trying to survive to add insult to injury is if they made it known help is on the way but they can't quite get to you yet, type of psy. op.



There's nothing that deflates anger, adrenalin and outrage faster than telling someone that help is on the way but there are delays because of weather perils and we all wouldn't want rescuers endangered.



posted on Jan, 2 2014 @ 08:42 PM
link   

American-philosopher
Well what if we look for signs of strange phenomnea after the Weather event. Like maybe the strange lgihts in the sky Over China during their big quake a couple years ago? Maybe that could be a sign of foul play??


I agree with you on the earthquake lights! One explanation for them is that earthquake stresses perturb the ionosphere and magnetic field and so produce these lights as an auroral plasma display.

There is something else that disturbs/agitates the ionosphere and utilizes the magnetic field lines in our world today and those are ionospheric heaters like HAARP. HAARP has been able to create aurora. So there seem to be two distinct possibilities here: natural forces or ionospheric heaters.



posted on Jan, 2 2014 @ 08:44 PM
link   
reply to post by luxordelphi
 


Sun Tzu "Art of War"

"All warfare is deception."

I would suppose all that would be dictated by how (hypothetically) the attack was designed and how whatever the intended effect was. It would be cruel if people were stranded on their roofs as it was very cold and raining and helicopters dropped cotton blankets, as the blanket is represented or associated with warmth it also does nothing for heat retention while wet as opposed to wool. It really would be a $hitty weapon to use on someone weather that is!

Or prolonged weather attacks (region specific) on a nations major food growing regions? In a significant way it would take away the sovereignty of a nation as then they would have to rely (more then likely) a clandestine attacker or the worlds food bank, it would also upset regions already impoverished that may also be mineral rich. The nefarious actions one could do with such a weapon is so broad wide continuous and deep I hope that such a weapon is never developed. Even if on the adverse it could be used for good like in the Fukishima tragedy as I know that before it becomes good for people it will be utilized as a weapon the risk is too high to give men this power!
edit on 2-1-2014 by Brotherman because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2014 @ 10:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Brotherman
 


Absolutely. Weather modification as a weapon, because it is cloaked in the robes of nature, is a hard one to fight.

A major part of the problem is the very real and huge lack of knowledge about our atmosphere. It's like giving Laurel & Hardy the keys to our kingdom.

From the link in the OP:


In October 2003 the U.S. National Research Council issued a report titled, "Critical issues in weather modification research." In the same month the U.S. Petagon released a controversial report, "An abrupt climate change scenario and its implications for United States national security," that explored how global warming could lead to rapid and catastrophic global cooling.



Recently, three speculative announcements concerning weather modification were in the news: Beijing's Study Institute of Artificial Influence on the Weather announced its intention of manipulating the weather to ensure optimum conditions for the 2008 Olympics; a private weather company in Florida advertised a new powder called Dyn-O-Gel with the power to “suck the moisture out of a thunderstorm or weaken a hurricane”; and the U.S. Air Force claimed that “in 2025, U.S. aerospace forces can 'own the weather' by capitalizing on emerging technologies and focusing development of those technologies to war-fighting applications.”



posted on Jan, 3 2014 @ 03:51 AM
link   
reply to post by luxordelphi
 


lol- Dyn-O-Gel - that's what makes babies nappies "more absorbent"!

It was a con - although to be fair repeating it here shows that it sure did absorb a lot of shirt!!


"Owning he weather 2025" was a thought exercise done as a course assessment - and repeating it as if it were some sort of secret research project or policy has to be breaking the rules for knowingly posting false information IMO.
edit on 3-1-2014 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 3 2014 @ 04:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


It is foolish, imo, to think that the government won't experiment and lie when it comes to weather modification when they have consistently done so in the past.

James Fleming, the author of the OP link, is, among other things, a historian on weather modification. He has researched and documented the absolute idiocy of one fantastic and dangerous idea after another being proposed and funded and tested.

During the 1800's, government and military experts determined that the atmosphere was a 'giant heat engine' and that the way to create rain was to set fire to forests. Later, during this same period, it was proposed that 'artillary engagements' (war) produced rain. Congress authorized $2500 to the navy to test this theory. Explosions to induce rain were also funded. One weather modifier drowned in the flood he produced.

The government began to find creative ways to distance themselves from funded experiments in which lives were lost when the threat of lawsuits became real.


Hatfield's technique involved building tall mysterious towers equipped with large shallow pans from which he patiently evaporated a proprietary fluid until it rained. He is largely remembered because his rainmaking activities in January 1916 coincided with a severe flood in San Diego. According to city water department records, over 28 inches of rain fell that month, the Morena Reservoir overflowed, and the Lower Otay Dam burst, sending a wall of water into downtown San Diego killing dozens of people, leaving many others homeless, and destroying all but two of the city's 112 bridges. Seeking to avoid lawsuits, the city of San Diego denied its connection to Hatfield, who had a vague contract for rain enhancement, and never paid him the $10,000 he claimed it owed him. Hatfield's suit against the city was finally dismissed in 1938.


And, as stated in the OP, how would anyone know that these activities were going on because our governments and military have the perfect cloaked weapon: weather which can be claimed as 'natural'.

Further, floods,hurricanes, volcanic explosions, earthquakes, global warming, climate change, jet stream anomalies, ocean current anomalies, arctic ice melts can all be claimed as natural. Some good ideas have been presented by posters in this thread on ways that we might use to determine if a disaster is natural or not. Perhaps you would like to contribute to that effort?



posted on Jan, 3 2014 @ 05:27 PM
link   
reply to post by luxordelphi
 


So where do we draw the line? Are all the conspiracies concerning the Government true because they sound good?

Might want to find just a little fact or two, before you oil up the Guillotine.

( I sure hope you never get called for jury duty.)






top topics



 
15
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join