He's saying that our burning of fossil fuels is an uncontrolled experiment in geoengineering. Read the link that I and Bury Red provided.
What in the world are they spraying? (Spoiler: Nothing)
- Thread starter Ecstasio
- Start date
Err, that is him saying that you misinterpreted his words in the first place. It's not the type of geoengineering you're talking about. It's about fossil fuel usage and the effects that has.
https://coto2.files.wordpress.com/2010/07/case_orange-5-10-2010-belfort-chemtrails.pdf
I've scrolled through this and read about one third of it. Most of it is way over my head but I am perturbed by these patents obtained for cloud seeding. What's the point of obtaining patents if you don't use them? None really.
I've scrolled through this and read about one third of it. Most of it is way over my head but I am perturbed by these patents obtained for cloud seeding. What's the point of obtaining patents if you don't use them? None really.
Cloud seeding is a known science has NOTHING to do with the chemtrail nonsense.
Also this about the Belfort group and their work. It even mentions the patents.
https://www.metabunk.org/debunked-belfort-group-case-orange-conclusions-recommendations.t95/
Always smart to google more info on anything related to this conspiracy theory. Saves having someone pointing out the wholes in your source.
Last edited:
Can you explain why they are so similar. (or what the difference is?)
One is a known science of seeding clouds to increase the chance of rain, the other is tinfoil hat nonsense about a vast global conspiracy to completely control the weather or our minds or poison us all. Not that difficult to understand
Sound pretty similar to me from what you've said. One is spraying chemicals from a plane and the other is spraying chemicals from a plane.
For a good laugh Google chemtrail and vinegar. Supposedly the solution to this all is too spray vinegar in the air it will rise up thousands of feet and defeat the so called chemtrails!
One of them tends to be relatively ineffective and is known to science. The other is super effective as mind control, creating long term droughts or extreme events such as hurricanes (depending on which youtube video convinced you).
So basically you are admitting you are too stupid to read. Congrats.
He won't understand the difference
Did you mean "too" there.
He won't understand the difference
Whilst I'm at it don't be rude.
Thanks for explaining. I still see a similarity obviously as both methods are the same. Why would anyone want to create long term droughts?
Yes darn autocorrect and I fixed it while you were posting.
what else did you expect with that type of response that shows a complete lack of reading comprehension skills?
I expected you to post something worth reading.
To punish adversaries.
Are you serious there?
You can't understand the difference between something that is real and something that is not?
Cloud seeding = real
Vast conspiracy that ignores science, rational thought and has almost every aircraft in the world involved in trying to control all the weather, control our minds and/or poison everyone including the families of those involved in the conspiracy = not real
Simple really
No they are causing cancer in everyone including themselves and their families! Protect yourself with vinegar!
And how would you know it's not real. You haven't a clue whether they're doing it or not or what their intentions are.
No, it's stupid. Other conspiratorial reasons include rich people hoarding water to make money from said droughts, or outright looking to kill the poor so they can have the world to themselves.
It's definitely not real. The scientists who would be the ones doing it are the ones working on the version that is still relatively ineffective.
In other words neither of you has any idea.
It's about as likely as the tooth fairy existing. YOU HAVE NO IDEA BRO
I can't prove that the universe isn't ruled by a large invisible pink rabbit named Roger. However, in the absence of any evidence that it is I think it is safe to assume that it isn't.
So if you can't see any evidence of something it doesn't exist. Righto.
Well duh - except for the see bit.
Are your purposefully being obtuse or do you really not see the absurdity of claiming an illuminati type conspiracy is spraying mind control and drought causing chemicals in the air?
I know...I can tell you did. Never mind.
I just wanted to know more about it but everyone just seems to want to give silly and condescending answers.
Looks like you conclusion drawing is operating at it's normal level.
Try listening to your own advice on this one. I tried helping you for a minute but you clearly didn't give a shit.
You'll no doubt carry on if I respond to that but it's far too tedious for me.
Well your answer didn't make logical sense. If I was the one being afraid of a fully explained every day occurrence then it might have worked. But I'm not (obviously).
If there is no evidence for something then a) it doesn't exists or b) you need a better experiment. If you keep experimenting and there is still no evidence then at some point you must use the operational logic that you must act as if it doesn't exist. This is how we process things all the time and if we didn't you would be paralysed as every single thing becomes as likely as another.
If there is no evidence for something then a) it doesn't exists or b) you need a better experiment. If you keep experimenting and there is still no evidence then at some point you must use the operational logic that you must act as if it doesn't exist. This is how we process things all the time and if we didn't you would be paralysed as every single thing becomes as likely as another.
Okay. It seems he really is talking about burning fossil fuels. Thanks for sharing that link. To be honest I am struggling to find any study that hasn't come from a computer model, which suggests that currently there are no large scale experiments involving the release of aerosols into the ionosphere, at least not with any civilian institution.
One thing though, if we are to consider burning fossil fuels as part of a geoengineering experiment then we are to include the aviation industry as part of that experiment, are we not? In which case, the chemtrail theory isn't so "wack."
Regardless of Tim Lenton, I think we are all in agreement that there most definitely exists technology to deliberately manipulate the planetary environment by stratospheric aerosol injection, or some other means, to counteract anthropogenic climate change. We see a large body of scientists and institutions beginning to openly support geoengineering programs as a way of reducing the effects of climate change. It has reached a level where it will be discussed on the political level before becoming legislation. And as we know, it won't be long before governments openly approve and begin conducting solar radiation management programs, like stratospheric aerosol injection.
So, if we are at a stage where we can implement this technology, we have already passed the stage where we are experimenting with this technology. Or did I get that backwards?
In 2009, I think, SPICE had already begun testing the equipment for stratospheric aerosol injection. Admittedly they were releasing water simply to test the delivery method. But they were testing nonetheless. A program as large-scale as manipulating the planet's environment to reflect solar radiation back into space by spraying aerosol's into the atmosphere isn't something you can implement by simply running a computer model. Surely we have been testing this method for some time already to ensure it works before putting it up for political debate?
Climate change, Tim Lenton, stratospheric aerosol injection aside, we still have the point of the military and defence departments / ministries of government who often operate beyond the public eye and above scrutiny in coalition with private companies / contractors. We know that the military have looked extensively at weather and climate modification, particularly with regard to the charging of the ionosphere to dominate global communications. This opens us to an entirely new avenue of investigation. And of course some terrific conspiracies
You seem to be hung up on the word experiment.
His usage is similar to
"Keeping Rooney in midfield is an uncontrolled experiment in performance art."
His usage is similar to
"Keeping Rooney in midfield is an uncontrolled experiment in performance art."