Dane Wigington - Inaccuracies and Omissions

Ross Marsden

Senior Member
Here's a very similar photo and meteorologist Paul Douglas calls them cloud streets:

View attachment 16448

From here: http://www.startribune.com/mother-s-day-miracle-80s-return-monday-tuesday-strong-t-storms-by-late-week/151113545/

Both in this and in the photo we have discussed, I noticed the cylindrical roll-like shapes. Does altocumulus undulatus have such forms? In Mick's photos, they are not cylindrical but look flatter and irregularly shaped.
Cloud streets are seldom recognised from the ground because of the scale of them. They were only seen as a distinct cloud form in satellite photos, and as far as I know, that is the only way to positively recognise them. From the ground it just looks like a sky of cumulus, some taller than others.

Those (again) are altocumulus undulatus. They are fairly obviouslt aligned perpendicular to the wind direction. There is a layer of other cloud below - cumulus fractus - so that perspective give you the clue that the altocumulus is much higher.
Typically, altocumulus, being a "middle cloud" is somewhere in the range of 7,000 to 24,000 (roughly). Once you recognise the cloud type, you have a bit of an idea on the height. In Christine's photo, I reckon the ac is at about 12,000 feet.
 

Leifer

Senior Member
.....middle-child neglection as always, typical. ;)
 

skephu

Senior Member
The current El Nino is predicted to bring heavy precipitation and possible flooding in California in the coming months:
Powerful El Nino likely to bring heavy precipitation—and possible flooding—to California over the next several months

This will practically end the drought, at least temporarily (it may come back next summer of course).

This is a forecast, but let's assume it's correct. I wonder how Dane Wigington will react after he has claimed for years that the California drought is deliberately caused by geoengineers.
Sure, he can blame the floods on the "geoengineers" as well--that's what he will probably do--but still, it's hard to explain why the geoengineers would suddenly decide to stop the drought and generate heavy rain instead. Dane may lose some credibility.
 

deirdre

Moderator
Staff member
but still, it's hard to explain why the geoengineers would suddenly decide to stop the drought and generate heavy rain instead. Dane may lose some credibility.
i think we'll hear the "see! our efforts are paying off! the government is afraid of us and trying to cover their tracks. This is proof we are on the right track"
 

JDubyah

Member
i think we'll hear the "see! our efforts are paying off! the government is afraid of us and trying to cover their tracks. This is proof we are on the right track"
Here's my guess:

"The first stage was to induce drought to kill off plant life and trigger forest fires, weakening the soil underneath. The next step is to introduce massive rainfall to promote flooding, landslides, and other natural disasters on the already weakened land. This is all going according to plan. <insert Monstanto reference here, where they come in to capitalize on the destroyed terrain>."
 
Last edited:

MikeG

Senior Member
The current El Nino is predicted to bring heavy precipitation and possible flooding in California in the coming months:
Powerful El Nino likely to bring heavy precipitation—and possible flooding—to California over the next several months

This will practically end the drought, at least temporarily (it may come back next summer of course).

This is a forecast, but let's assume it's correct. I wonder how Dane Wigington will react after he has claimed for years that the California drought is deliberately caused by geoengineers.
Sure, he can blame the floods on the "geoengineers" as well--that's what he will probably do--but still, it's hard to explain why the geoengineers would suddenly decide to stop the drought and generate heavy rain instead. Dane may lose some credibility.

Dane Wigington seems to be following a path blazed by David Icke in that everything is caused by some larger conspiracy. He has been arguing for quite some time that the is no "natural weather."

http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/jeff-rense-and-dane-wigington-the-end-of-natural-weather/


He’s repeated this theme in many venues.

http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2015/08/the-john-moore-radio-show-03-august-2015-geoengineering-dane-wigington-3194508.html

So, following this "logic," drought is the result of the global power structure as is rain, snow, hurricanes, etc.

It's convenient in the sense that he will never be wrong about the weather no matter what form it takes.
 

Engineer

Active Member
A bit frustrating that all the comments are disabled in Dane's Geoengineering YouTube videos. I guess there is no chance linking to this site from the comments section on his website will get by his moderation staff?
 

Trailblazer

Moderator
Staff member
@Engineer - Dane has been told about this site and the realities of contrails numerous times. He knows the truth but has somehow convinced himself that all science is faked to cover up the conspiracy, and everyone who points out his mistakes is a "shill".
 
Last edited by a moderator:

skephu

Senior Member
A bit frustrating that all the comments are disabled in Dane's Geoengineering YouTube videos. I guess there is no chance linking to this site from the comments section on his website will get by his moderation staff?
No. Absolutely no chance. Very strongly moderated. Only the "Dane you are a hero" and "Here in city X we are being sprayed like bugs" type comments get posted.
 

Lisa P

Active Member
I sometimes argue with Danes followers on facebook. If a news channel or meteorologist posts a picture of the sky and there happens to be a contrail in it they can come out in droves to say it is chemtrails or geoengineering and put links up to Danes website. Some of the followers will even rebuke me in Jesus name or tell me they love me and their god loves me or that I am spreading evil etc. etc. They are told not to talk to debunkers because we are Govt trolls or shills, just post and leave. They have also been advised if they do that debunkers get very angry.
If I post anything from Metabunk some of them can go a bit crazy spouting it is evil. I think they are reaching out to Christians and in Australia (where we aren't so christian) it is the 'new agers' or alternate health people.

There was one lady I had posted a link about contrails on her comment and another lady has come in and advised her not to listen to me that I was evil but to go away and pray and use her discretion. I find it very interesting which is one of the reasons I just go posting the facts or links to websites about how contrails are made. I also do it because I was once down the rabbit hole and it was through arguing with debunkers that I eventually saw sense.

Grandchild #4 is on the way so I won't have as much spare time soon so I guess they will see that as a good thing ;-)
 
Dane often says or writes, I don't want you to just believe me, do the research yourself. But if your research brings you to the conclusion that the many unreal things he believes in don't exist, then of course Dane will ignore you, and your viewpoints will never see the light of day at his websites. Dane has made up his mind that his thinking is completely valid, period. Taking this position, he no longer has to spend any time considering information that shows he is wrong. In this kind of bubble world he has ensconced himself within, he creates his own reality for himself, and his followers.
 

JRBids

Senior Member
Glenn Beck says the same thing "don't believe me, do your own research". I doubt many people who believe him do ANY research, and those who do look on Beck's website. Just like I'm sure those who take Dane's word as gospel look on geoengineering watch . org, or chemtrails global, for their sources.
 

Engineer

Active Member
As someone who has just commented a simple and harmless question on his web site and had it erased within a couple hours, I am somewhat shocked at the lack of open communication allowed there. I see the "donate" area is prominent on the website and I wonder if the guy actually believes what he is saying or is just making so much money off the fear mongering that he has decided to milk it for all he can. I wonder how much money the site brings in and what that money is actually used for?
 

Trailblazer

Moderator
Staff member
As someone who has just commented a simple and harmless question on his web site and had it erased within a couple hours, I am somewhat shocked at the lack of open communication allowed there. I see the "donate" area is prominent on the website and I wonder if the guy actually believes what he is saying or is just making so much money off the fear mongering that he has decided to milk it for all he can. I wonder how much money the site brings in and what that money is actually used for?
I wondered the same thing, but the consensus seems to be that he is a "true believer" and is actually losing money on the deal, as it has taken over his life to such a degree.

I'm sure @Van Wigington would have an idea whether that is the case, but I quite understand if he would rather not comment.
 

Jay Reynolds

Senior Member
As someone who has just commented a simple and harmless question on his web site and had it erased within a couple hours, I am somewhat shocked at the lack of open communication allowed there.
I make frequent comments just for spite, and yes not one of hundreds has ever been seen by anyone else. Maybe it earns me a special place in Dane's Hell but if nothing else I feel somewhat better letting him know in no uncertain terms that he is wrong.
 

Engineer

Active Member
I make frequent comments just for spite, and yes not one of hundreds has ever been seen by anyone else. Maybe it earns me a special place in Dane's Hell but if nothing else I feel somewhat better letting him know in no uncertain terms that he is wrong.
I have been tempted to do the same but have resorted to trying to respond to a few YouTube comments to point people in the right direction. It is a risky place to try to hold a polite and serious conversation but since that's where most people are being led astray I figured it could hurt to try to point folks to the path to enlightenment.

In any case Jay, I happened to stumble across some long comments to some chemtrail guy where someone was posing as an whistleblower explaining just how chemicals were being hidden on planes and how the pilots were being fooled based on fuel weights and all sorts of other malarkey. In the end, your name was mentioned as in never trust Jay Reynolds, I about fell out of my chair laughing and realized it was all a joke. If that was you it was quite brilliant. Perhaps there is even a thread I can read about this here? After seeing the blatant and irresponsible misinformation being spread by Dane, I could use a bit of of a laugh.
 

tadaaa

Active Member
I have been tempted to do the same but have resorted to trying to respond to a few YouTube comments to point people in the right direction. It is a risky place to try to hold a polite and serious conversation but since that's where most people are being led astray I figured it could hurt to try to point folks to the path to enlightenment.

In any case Jay, I happened to stumble across some long comments to some chemtrail guy where someone was posing as an whistleblower explaining just how chemicals were being hidden on planes and how the pilots were being fooled based on fuel weights and all sorts of other malarkey. In the end, your name was mentioned as in never trust Jay Reynolds, I about fell out of my chair laughing and realized it was all a joke. If that was you it was quite brilliant. Perhaps there is even a thread I can read about this here? After seeing the blatant and irresponsible misinformation being spread by Dane, I could use a bit of of a laugh.
I am sure there is somewhere on here - I have read a thread that mentions it in a bit of detail
 

tadaaa

Active Member
Yes, thanks - that's the thread I was talking about

As I recall the discussion centered around whether those tactics where useful or not
 

skephu

Senior Member
We get a taste how Dane will react to the considerable amount of moisture that is coming to California: The Desperation Of The Geoengineers, Documenting An Engineered Cool-Down

He thinks it's an "engineered cooldown" because it is so "unnatural":
The weather can be dry or wet, hot or cold, Dane never likes it, and will always believe it's some evil action by geoengineers. This guy is hard to please! :)

But he seems to predict that there will be very little rain because of the "highly aerosolized" atmosphere:
The weather forecast for Redding, however, indicates a fair amount of rain for this week, so now we will see who's the better meteorologist: Dane or the meteorologists.

Daniel Swain at the California Weather Blog forecasts a rather wet December for the whole of California, which will continue through March due to the very strong El Nino going on. I can't wait to see how Dane will explain why this is not good and how it destroys the planet.
 

Dan Page

Active Member
Seems like Dane has gone all out on his latest "geoengineering orchestration", does not matter what is happening, it is geoengineered, and it is bad/deadly/poisonous. I nominate this paragraph as the most nonsensical, unscientific, backwards explanation of what is happening:
And then of course, have to throw in haarp, wouldn't be complete without that:
Yes, he did say "firehouse", but I think he meant "firehose". Dane is if nothing else, entertaining :)
 
This part gave me a good chuckle " Very rapid uniform raindrops (which can be observed in puddles and on windshields) ". Down here in So Cal where we live, that's just something normal rain does ;)
 

NoParty

Senior Member
But he seems to predict that there will be very little rain because of the "highly aerosolized" atmosphere:
Who says I never learn anything from reading MetaBunk?!?

I have a number of significant outdoor projects in California and other western states this December and January...

--and though Dane did a bit more science there than I could really follow--I think I learned that as long as I
"highly aerosolize" the area around me, I should be able to do my work, mostly keeping "the moisture from falling" :)

Rain B Gone.jpg
 

M Bornong

Senior Member
If it brings floods and mudslides - which is certainly possible - then he will probably point to that.
I think there was a scientist from several hundred years ago that said something like, what goes up must come down? Dang, His name is on the tip of my tongue. ;) Mudslides have been part of the shaping of the mountains in the western US far longer than any claims of geoengineering. I'm sure that even as old as they are, the appalachians still have their
share of mudslides.
 

Belfrey

Senior Member
I think there was a scientist from several hundred years ago that said something like, what goes up must come down? Dang, His name is on the tip of my tongue. ;) Mudslides have been part of the shaping of the mountains in the western US far longer than any claims of geoengineering. I'm sure that even as old as they are, the appalachians still have their share of mudslides.
Absolutely, and when I worked as a biologist in southern California, we were very aware of how El Niño/La Niña affected the rainfall for the year. I'm just thinking that the years of severe drought (and wildfire in some areas) will have reduced the soil-stabilizing vegetation cover, and it's amazing how those clay slopes (which are rock-hard in the summer) turn to goo once they get soaked. California sure needs the rain, but with the heavy pounding that is expected, not all of the effects will be positive.
 

tadaaa

Active Member
when we get periods of drought in the UK (yes it does happen!!!! complete with hosepipe bans)

the weather forecasters are always at pains to stress that what is needed to replenish the water stocks is NOT a couple of days/weeks of heavy rain - as the majority simply runs of into the steams / rivers (often causing catastrophic flash flooding in the process - google "boscatle floods")

but months of gentle precipitation

we have, in fact had some pretty serious flooding - just this week in the north of England
 

Trailblazer

Moderator
Staff member
we have, in fact had some pretty serious flooding - just this week in the north of England
Yes, there was an unconfirmed 24-hour rainfall record of around 14 inches up in Cumbria. I've already seen people linking it to "weaponised weather" on Facebook... because the NWO are obviously trying to destroy small Lakeland villages.
 

David Fraser

Senior Member
Yes, there was an unconfirmed 24-hour rainfall record of around 14 inches up in Cumbria. I've already seen people linking it to "weaponised weather" on Facebook... because the NWO are obviously trying to destroy small Lakeland villages.
David Lim did his piece on the flooding of the Somerset levels with partly a claim that they were trying to destroy arable land so they will push GM crops. It makes one wonder if he will raise his head and say they are trying to destroy agriculture so there has to be a move to GM. Given there is a lot of sheep farming in the Lakes one wonders if Monsanto have developed aquatic sheep. I am certain a patent will turn up.
 

Whitebeard

Senior Member
David Lim did his piece on the flooding of the Somerset levels with partly a claim that they were trying to destroy arable land so they will push GM crops. It makes one wonder if he will raise his head and say they are trying to destroy agriculture so there has to be a move to GM. Given there is a lot of sheep farming in the Lakes one wonders if Monsanto have developed aquatic sheep. I am certain a patent will turn up.
Well I am thinking of opening a seal farm on Derwent Water
 
Last edited:

Svartbjørn

Senior Member
A bit frustrating that all the comments are disabled in Dane's Geoengineering YouTube videos. I guess there is no chance linking to this site from the comments section on his website will get by his moderation staff?
It probably would if you used a URL shortener.. at least until they followed the link
 

tadaaa

Active Member
Another word to add to my mental UK/US English dictionary (admit to having to look up "hosepipe", US equivalent is garden hose :))
Well an interesting observation Marin B, and simply illustrates the wonder of language (and the confusion it can cause)

Because I wholeartly agree

Although in the UK a ban on using a garden hose IS officially known has a "hosepipe" ban

I concur, as would every person in the UK - a hosepipe IS a garden hose

Attached to my garden wall I have a garden hose - lol

But in a period of a government sanctioned drought we have a "hosepipe" ban
 

Ross Marsden

Senior Member
Actually, there is some foundation to tht first statement. Excessive pollution (such as in parts of China) has the effect of reducing precipitation because the inflated concentration of CCN results in very small droplets that take a llong time to coalesce into big enough droplets to fall as drizzle or rain, etc.
Does Air Pollution Increase Or Decrease Rainfall?
Aerosol pollution slows winds, reduces rainfall

The second statement there just does not make sense. If there is high numbers of CCN, then droplets will be small and this inhibits precipitation (first statement). So how can there be precipitation? By the time the droplets have coalesced enough to fall as precipitation, it is too late to measure the size distribution of the droplets! But you can sort of see where he was going with it.
 
Top