Chemtrail discussion: ethics, psyops, and stuff

Jay Reynolds

Senior Member.
Just wondering, how much time do you think is needed to either prove that it isn't happening or that it is?
If it's been supposedly going on for x number of years, how much time needs to pass without results to tell that it wasn't happening, and what do you expect to happen in time that would prove it was happening?
If time DOESN'T tell in 20 years, won't you just say it's still being covered up?

Pete, there are geoengineering detectors operating worldwide which show nothing happening. George knows this.
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Just wondering, how much time do you think is needed to either prove that it isn't happening or that it is?
If it's been supposedly going on for x number of years, how much time needs to pass without results to tell that it wasn't happening, and what do you expect to happen in time that would prove it was happening?
If time DOESN'T tell in 20 years, won't you just say it's still being covered up?
I have said repeatedly that the most logical strategy to effect climatic change and avoid detection are the following. . . . 1) one nudges the concentration of aerosol within a very narrow range to be within the background variance which will not cause alarm; 2) This tactic also slowly pushes the climate in a direction which minimizes undesirable side effects . . . 3) It allows you to react appropriately to a sudden massive injection of SOx into the stratosphere that happened in 1991 by Mt Pinatubo and was estimated to be 20 Tg or 5 to 10 times the amount you want to use to nudge the climate . . .
 

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
Yeah I understand your hypothesis for the invisible operation (well 'understand' might be a stretch, 'am familiar with' is better :)).
But you also said 'time will tell'.
How will time tell, if no evidence of even a definitive result will ever be left?
By that rule, you can't use the absence of evidence to show it didn't happen either, so you'll still not know.

I imagine you think an admittance will be made at some safe far-off future point when no-one's going to be held culpable - but if no admittance is ever made, how will you decide between it didn't happen, or, they just still won't admit it?

You've created a scenario where time will never tell it seems.
I know it was just an innocent figure of speech, but if you think about it, it's insolvable.
(or unsolvable, depending on what the correct grammar is)
 

MikeC

Closed Account
I guess that is where we disagree . . . I think people who can pull off the Manhattan Project and a few others (not as large) are quite capable of a covert stratospheric sulfur injection program . . . I am just speculating how it might be done . . . I might be right about some concepts and I may be way off on others but I have confidence in their capabilities . . .

George in the post you quoted when writing your reply above I said:

And yes, of course any G20 country could "do it" fairly easily - as long as by "do it" you do not include the ridiculous assumptions that it is all going to be competely undetectable.

Remember the Manhattan project was NOT kept a total secret - the Soviet Union found out quite a lot about it before the first bomb was dropped!
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Yeah I understand your hypothesis for the invisible operation (well 'understand' might be a stretch, 'am familiar with' is better :)).
But you also said 'time will tell'.
How will time tell, if no evidence of even a definitive result will ever be left?
By that rule, you can't use the absence of evidence to show it didn't happen either, so you'll still not know.

I imagine you think an admittance will be made at some safe far-off future point when no-one's going to be held culpable - but if no admittance is ever made, how will you decide between it didn't happen, or, they just still won't admit it?

You've created a scenario where time will never tell it seems.
I know it was just an innocent figure of speech, but if you think about it, it's insolvable.
(or unsolvable, depending on what the correct grammar is)
Point well made . . . however, me thinks if there was pre-emptive geoengineering over the last decade or so and it did work to stave off a catastrophe someone will eventually take credit for the heroic efforts . . . If it was a waste of money or was a disaster no one will want to take credit but at a safe time in the future may be outed . . .
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
George in the post you quoted when writing your reply above I said:



Remember the Manhattan project was NOT kept a total secret - the Soviet Union found out quite a lot about it before the first bomb was dropped!
I am not denying any of that but as I said in #100 above . . .


That is not a bad argument; however, the leaks to the Russians were not known to the public until after the detonations . . . it was in the interest of the US Government to eventually publicized this fact as well as significant information about the entire Manhattan Project . . as might be true in the future about geoengineering experimentation and possible operations . . .
Content from External Source
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
But I think that holding a contrary position just because you feel sorry for the underdog is not going to advance the common good. Surely there comes a point when you can see the theory holds no water, and you are just debating for the sake of debate, not truth.

At that point you are not even really debating, just blindly promoting.

Sometimes a position is the underdog position just because it is wrong. Championing that underdog just propagates falsehoods.
Mick, I have had time to sleep on your comments and have pondered my motivations, etc. while my initial motivation may well have been to help the underdog I think I have evolved beyond that position . . . through my research I feel there is one personality which keeps appearing and seems to galvanize my suspicion something really happened and is possibly ongoing . . . this individual epitomizes the mentality of the WWII and Cold War eras and had the power and influence to put in place such a program before his death . . . that person is Dr Edward Teller and his protégés at LLNL . . .
 

Fred259

New Member
Have you ever seen this. Perhaps this is what's happening.





..........................................me thinks...
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Have you ever seen this. Perhaps this is what's happening.





..........................................me thinks...

Interesting . . . me thinks I don't agree with anyone . . . not the CT people or the Metabunk/Contrail Science mind think either . . .
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Mick, I have had time to sleep on your comments and have pondered my motivations, etc. while my initial motivation may well have been to help the underdog I think I have evolved beyond that position . . . through my research I feel there is one personality which keeps appearing and seems to galvanize my suspicion something really happened and is possibly ongoing . . . this individual epitomizes the mentality of the WWII and Cold War eras and had the power and influence to put in place such a program before his death . . . that person is Dr Edward Teller and his protégés at LLNL . . .

So essentially it's the "mad scientist" scenario. In your scenario, who exactly knows about it? Does the President know? Congress? The FBI? Any climate scientists? The Russians? The Chinese? The Iranians? The British?
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
So essentially it's the "mad scientist" scenario. In your scenario, who exactly knows about it? Does the President know? Congress? The FBI? Any climate scientists? The Russians? The Chinese? The Iranians? The British?
IMO . . . the same people who run black ops, Area 51, etc. . . . Whoever that is . . . if you know . . . I would like to know your opinion . . .

PS . . . I think Teller was far from Mad . . .
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
IMO . . . the same people who run black ops, Area 51, etc. . . . Whoever that is . . . if you know . . . I would like to know your opinion . . .

The question was not who runs it, but who knows about it. Let's start at the top. Do you think the president knows about it?
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
The question was not who runs it, but who knows about it. Let's start at the top. Do you think the president knows about it?
That is a difficult question . . . I would say he (President) might not have authorized the program but may be aware it is ongoing through security briefings . . . Congress in general . . .No or by extreme exception . . . Yes; FBI . . . No; Climate Scientists . . . only those with appropriate security clearances at LLNL and maybe a few at somewhere like Raytheon; Other Countries . . . those cooperating with the project but very, very limited groups similar to those in US . . .
 

lotek

Active Member
Biology and observations of human group behavior rather precludes us from effectively keeping systems such as these isolated(secret) from the rest of the system. We, as an animal simply do not exhibit the traits required to "do our job" correct a high enough percentage of the time to allow for the formation of systems(secrets) so large and involved, while maintaining isolation(secrecy) of the system(secret). We are able to keep some systems isolated but as it grows in complexity and as the number of divergent attributes(individual people) increases we loose the ability to keep each divergent line isolated.

Now what we do seem to have, and reproducibly so, is a desire to see patterns whether or not they exist. aswell, we desire self affirmation and have the ability to ignore information when it conflicts with this. Now this is not necessarily bad as it is an emergent property of auto-correcting systems in nature, but it is hard, by design, to resist or even notice.

ergo, we should not even need to get into such specifics. We will always see systems and patterns where none are present. It is an emergent property of natural systems. Just as one can take the recently published data on corporate wealth isolation and scream NWO/blackops/conspiracy when you see that the most powerful and wealthy are highly interconnected, one could also argue that it is simply how natural systems work, the progressing tend to group due to higher chance of progress. All natural systems exhibit this patterns. trees growing, ants working, money moving.

It is a desire within yourself to elevate yourself above your peers which leads you to cling to a fringe idea regardless of the logic/attributes involved, to persist beyond any and all reasonable logic. it makes you feel better than you did before. special.
 

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
Biology and observations of human group behavior rather precludes us from effectively keeping systems such as these isolated(secret) from the rest of the system. We, as an animal simply do not exhibit the traits required to "do our job" correct a high enough percentage of the time to allow for the formation of systems(secrets) so large and involved, while maintaining isolation(secrecy) of the system(secret). We are able to keep some systems isolated but as it grows in complexity and as the number of divergent attributes(individual people) increases we loose the ability to keep each divergent line isolated.....

I agree with what you say, but with the above point - that will not phase a conspiracy believer.

That is why they invented reptilians, or the cold psychopathic elite. They just have to say those people aren't really human, or were gentically engineered by aliens, or are related to the nephilim.

For people not prepared to do that, then your points might get through.
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Biology and observations of human group behavior rather precludes us from effectively keeping systems such as these isolated(secret) from the rest of the system. We, as an animal simply do not exhibit the traits required to "do our job" correct a high enough percentage of the time to allow for the formation of systems(secrets) so large and involved, while maintaining isolation(secrecy) of the system(secret). We are able to keep some systems isolated but as it grows in complexity and as the number of divergent attributes(individual people) increases we loose the ability to keep each divergent line isolated.

Now what we do seem to have, and reproducibly so, is a desire to see patterns whether or not they exist. aswell, we desire self affirmation and have the ability to ignore information when it conflicts with this. Now this is not necessarily bad as it is an emergent property of auto-correcting systems in nature, but it is hard, by design, to resist or even notice.

ergo, we should not even need to get into such specifics. We will always see systems and patterns where none are present. It is an emergent property of natural systems. Just as one can take the recently published data on corporate wealth isolation and scream NWO/blackops/conspiracy when you see that the most powerful and wealthy are highly interconnected, one could also argue that it is simply how natural systems work, the progressing tend to group due to higher chance of progress. All natural systems exhibit this patterns. trees growing, ants working, money moving.

It is a desire within yourself to elevate yourself above your peers which leads you to cling to a fringe idea regardless of the logic/attributes involved, to persist beyond any and all reasonable logic. it makes you feel better than you did before. special.

Hmmmmmm . . . what you just speculated about above is no more provable than the existence of a covert stratospheric aerosol injection program . . .
 

lotek

Active Member
I don't necessarily disagree with you.

Sort of how i don't disagree with the statement "gravity/evolution is only a theory"

While a technical truth, most rational information falls strong to one side in both instances. My post draws heavily on modern psychological observation which is not necessarily a true science at this point, but it is more a personal affirmation or announcement of alignment than a critical post about specific data.

As well i feel most all the information contrary to chemtrail programs has already been presented clearly enough and in adequate volume on this forum to preclude me from needing to draw upon specifics at this point.
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
I don't necessarily disagree with you.

Sort of how i don't disagree with the statement "gravity/evolution is only a theory"

While a technical truth, most rational information falls strong to one side in both instances. My post draws heavily on modern psychological observation which is not necessarily a true science at this point, but it is more a personal affirmation or announcement of alignment than a critical post about specific data.

As well i feel most all the information contrary to chemtrail programs has already been presented clearly enough and in adequate volume on this forum to preclude me from needing to draw upon specifics at this point.
Since you enjoy psychological analysis and speculation . . . would you care to analyze Dr Edward Teller . . . the single most obvious candidate for the father of aggressive strategies and public geoengineering debates??


Secrecy, once accepted, becomes an addiction.
Edward Teller
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/e/edwardtell377961.html#MHu9G8U8oAXE5gy2.99
Content from External Source
 

Jay Reynolds

Senior Member.
Biology and observations of human group behavior rather precludes us from effectively keeping systems such as these isolated(secret) from the rest of the system. We, as an animal simply do not exhibit the traits required to "do our job" correct a high enough percentage of the time to allow for the formation of systems(secrets) so large and involved, while maintaining isolation(secrecy) of the system(secret). We are able to keep some systems isolated but as it grows in complexity and as the number of divergent attributes(individual people) increases we loose the ability to keep each divergent line isolated.

Now what we do seem to have, and reproducibly so, is a desire to see patterns whether or not they exist. aswell, we desire self affirmation and have the ability to ignore information when it conflicts with this. Now this is not necessarily bad as it is an emergent property of auto-correcting systems in nature, but it is hard, by design, to resist or even notice.

ergo, we should not even need to get into such specifics. We will always see systems and patterns where none are present. It is an emergent property of natural systems. Just as one can take the recently published data on corporate wealth isolation and scream NWO/blackops/conspiracy when you see that the most powerful and wealthy are highly interconnected, one could also argue that it is simply how natural systems work, the progressing tend to group due to higher chance of progress. All natural systems exhibit this patterns. trees growing, ants working, money moving.

It is a desire within yourself to elevate yourself above your peers which leads you to cling to a fringe idea regardless of the logic/attributes involved, to persist beyond any and all reasonable logic. it makes you feel better than you did before. special.

Lotek, GeorgeB is trying to draw you into his illogic loop where he has created a fantasy scenario of geoengineering. He does this on just about every thread he posts on.
Feel free to feed his fantasy. He is a glutton for the self-affirmation you speak of, and actually seems to misinterpret our opposition to his meal as the affirmation for it.

Of course, what I just said could just be a personal affirmation of a pattern which doesn't exist, but my observation is based on reading nearly 2000 posts he has made.

Needless to say your comment above is presciently insightful and mainly true in my opinion.
 

Jazzy

Closed Account
Lotek, GeorgeB is trying to draw you into his illogic loop where he has created a fantasy scenario of geoengineering. He does this on just about every thread he posts on.
Feel free to feed his fantasy. He is a glutton for the self-affirmation you speak of, and actually seems to misinterpret our opposition to his meal as the affirmation for it. Of course, what I just said could just be a personal affirmation of a pattern which doesn't exist, but my observation is based on reading nearly 2000 posts he has made. Needless to say your comment above is presciently insightful and mainly true in my opinion.
And may I just second that entirely. Jay, it is truly amazing how often you speak so precisely that which I would have spoken. Hey--- :)
 
Top