Debunked: Hurricane Sandy, Chemtrails, HAARP and Conspiracy Theories

[Mick West]

All I'm doing is noting that there's no evidence it was steered. Do you think there IS evidence it was steered? What's the evidence?

 

[Mick West]

So these people you accuse of suppressing a cure for cancer, their children never get cancer? Or they let their children die so they can make more money? Are you a parent? How much is your child's life worth to you?

Sheeple who read something that fits their ideology so well it never occurs to them to think the implications through, implications like the stunningly obvious fact that doctors have children too and children get cancer?

Given there's so many ways of making money, doing things like not curing their friends and relatives (and their own) cancer, seems like a rather silly way of going about it.

 

[Met Watch]

Ok, back atcha - where is your evidence that it is NOT caused by HAARP? Silly question to ask isn't it? Where's your personal evidence to show me that the solar system is helio-centric? No, I don't want you quoting some book or website, I want proof. Could you fly me around in space and show me? Could you sit down with me for years and chart stars and planets and the sun so we can see the movement, not because someone told us that, but because we "proved" it ourselves. What if that didn't constitute "proof" to me? What then? Yep, we've both observed such our whole lives but where is the "proof" for it? Right in this minute? Define "proof". Is it the same for the next guy as it is for you?

You guys are making the claim, so you have to present the evidence. We do not have that burden. And our proof is meteorology - specifically, the KNOWN influences of upper-level systems, ridges, troughs, and atmospheric blocking to steer cyclones. It is widely accepted fact - why do you choose not to believe it? Better question: how can you refute our evidence?

 

[HappyMonday]

So, yep, today, the people (use that term loosely)...

Love it when conspiracy types talk about Hitler's / nazism's actions in the negative, then go on to dehumanise a segment of the population.

 

[Just saying....]

All I'm doing is noting that there's no evidence it was steered. Do you think there IS evidence it was steered? What's the evidence?

Mick, the only reason I went looking for info on this particular subject is because I literally asked the Divine if HAARP had a hand in this. I was told yes. I don't really need to look for "proof" but it was more a curiosity thing and also keeping my thumb on the pulse of how awakened the masses are. I KNOW such things as HAARP go on and I have worked to get a solid connection with the Divine so I asked and was told. Now, I say "KNOW" but there's a major difference between having heard something and knowing it.

Mick, I strongly suggest that you ask your Divine self what the answer to your question rather than dismissing out of hand that such can and does go on. And quit asking for others to provide you proof. If you want more info on such, go looking for it. Did it happen that way in Mick's world or didn't it? You don't need anyone or anything outside yourself to prove anything to you.... and, as I already said, they can't anyway.

Frankly, there is SO much evidence of this and so many other dirty dealings that the better question might be where is there NOT any evidence of this. I'd like to know how can you NOT know these things? Where is your proof that the sun rose this morning?

Both the light and the dark actually wanted a scenario like this - they both have their reasons, and those who can wake up, just got a jolt. Those who won't wake up are sealing their fate also. Perhaps it's just further delineating one side from the other. .... not to mention that Earth herself gets to clear some crappy energy when such things happen. I'll bet a whole lot of east coasters are clearing some old pent up energy about now too. Lots of water involved, and water element has to do with emotions. Yep, lots of that surfacing too.

 

[Just saying...]

You guys are making the claim, so you have to present the evidence. We do not have that burden. And our proof is meteorology - specifically, the KNOWN influences of upper-level systems, ridges, troughs, and atmospheric blocking to steer cyclones. It is widely accepted fact - why do you choose not to believe it? Better question: how can you refute our evidence?

Well, there's your answer. In your world, HAARP didn't play a role in this. Your mind is set. End of discussion for you. Why are you asking for others to prove to you what is self-evident to them. If you don't want to believe it, no one is saying you have to. Stay asleep. Your right of free-will guarantees you can.

 

[Just saying...]

Love it when conspiracy types talk about Hitler's / nazism's actions in the negative, then go on to dehumanise a segment of the population.

It's debatable how literally "human" some of them are. If I talked about dogs and didn't call 'em human would you say I was dehumanizing them? They aren't human. Why are you humanizing them? And that's all I meant by that.

Some of them are actually human though and yet they don't have any problem acting like Hitler, any more so than their non-human cohorts. I don't care if we live on Animal Farm and the pigs are running things... pigs aren't human. Doesn't matter if the pigs are good rulers or not, they aren't human. Just saying...

 

[Mick West]

Frankly, there is SO much evidence of this and so many other dirty dealings that the better question might be where is there NOT any evidence of this.

No, there is not. I've not seen you present one single piece of evidence. Hence I've got no reason to think this is happening.

 

[Just saying...]

You guys are making the claim, so you have to present the evidence. We do not have that burden. And our proof is meteorology - specifically, the KNOWN influences of upper-level systems, ridges, troughs, and atmospheric blocking to steer cyclones. It is widely accepted fact - why do you choose not to believe it? Better question: how can you refute our evidence?

The burden of "proof", or more importantly, TRUTH - for YOU - lies quite firmly on YOUR shoulders. It always has, it always will. I already went over that - no one else can determine proof or truth for you.

I see that Mick started this thread. He is not writing his comments on someone else's thread about HAARP being part of what caused Sandy and other weather things. So, using your logic, then where is Mick's proof that HAARP was NOT involved?

 

[Just saying...]

No, there is not. I've not seen you present one single piece of evidence. Hence I've got no reason to think this is happening.

LOL. Then don't. Why start a thread on this? You look out there and see people saying it's HAARP and you don't think so. So don't think so. Roll over and go back to sleep.

 

[HappyMonday]

It's debatable how literally "human" some of them are. If I talked about dogs and didn't call 'em human would you say I was dehumanizing them? They aren't human. Why are you humanizing them? And that's all I meant by that.

Some of them are actually human though and yet they don't have any problem acting like Hitler, any more so than their non-human cohorts. I don't care if we live on Animal Farm and the pigs are running things... pigs aren't human. Doesn't matter if the pigs are good rulers or not, they aren't human. Just saying...

Cool. Does a person qualify for humanity by agreeing that they believe the same things as you?

 

[Just saying...]

Cool. Does a person qualify for humanity by agreeing that they believe the same things as you?

A cat is a cat. A dog is a dog. A human is a human. It doesn't matter if they agree with you or not.

 

[HappyMonday]

A cat is a cat. A dog is a dog. A human is a human. It doesn't matter if they agree with you or not.

A human acting like a pig is still a pig though right? Not a human-pig hybrid? Or a deluded human?

 

[Mick West]

The burden of "proof", or more importantly, TRUTH - for YOU - lies quite firmly on YOUR shoulders. It always has, it always will. I already went over that - no one else can determine proof or truth for you.

I see that Mick started this thread. He is not writing his comments on someone else's thread about HAARP being part of what caused Sandy and other weather things. So, using your logic, then where is Mick's proof that HAARP was NOT involved?

Debunking is about removing bunk, it's not about proving the opposite. It's bout looking at the EVIDENCE and seeing if it's bunk or not.

I demonstrated that the storm moved as it was expected to move. I explained why it moved like this. I noted the lack of evidence for steering. I explained the small effect HAARP has, and how far away it is.

That's not the same thing as proving the opposite, but if you take your divine revelation out of the equation, then what actually is the evidence you think I've not debunked?

 

[Jay Reynolds]

Love it when conspiracy types talk about Hitler's / nazism's actions in the negative, then go on to dehumanise a segment of the population.

Now she is using that word, "the masses...". Dehumanization again.
Hey, guest, you are Revmichelle, right? You can be yourself here, even if we are just stupid seething inhuman masses of ignorant flesh.
Break it all down for us. We need to know where you stand. Don't be shy.

 

[Just saying...]

A human acting like a pig is still a pig though right? Not a human-pig hybrid? Or a deluded human?

Goodness sakes honey. If you're looking for a fight, stick your head in your *ss and fight for air.

I'm just answering your question. Now, the species of Earth human is quite the mix of galactic (maybe even universal) genetics, so, yep, it's kind of about how much of more recent non-Earth-human genetics are involved with some "people".

Yeah, I suppose you could call ETs "people" too, but I was making the point that they are not all (Earth) "humans".

They can still act like pigs though if they'd like and so can humans.

And I guess some non Earth species may be very closely related to us and might be more human-like than even some of those we see as human that live here. Am I using the term "people" properly in a more galactic sense? Perhaps not.

But your use of "pig" is not how I used the word "pig." I meant pig as literally the species - pig. You're using it in a derogatory sense.

My use of "people - use that term loosely" was not derogatory but actually quite literal, as in, I meant that not all of them are the species human, regardless of how they act and what they look like. That's all I'm saying.

 

[Unregistered]

We have had potential "cures for cancer" since back in the 80's, purposely pushed aside by the cancer industry itself, as treating cancer is a profitable business. It's at least a $ 400 billion industry, and they WANT to keep people sick so they can treat them with expensive chemo, radiation, surgery etc

What evidence do you have that we secretly have the "cure for cancer" ? I am a scientist and I think that statement is absolutely ridiculous. I know people that research cancer. Cancer is extremely difficult to understand because it is so complex and one type of cancer can be very different from other types of cancer. I know people that have studied cancer for their entire careers and still do not understand a lot about how it works. To suggest their is a secret "cure" is ridiculous because thousands of honest scientist like myself have been working for years to find a cure and trust me, there isn't one yet. Do you even know anything about cancer? Probably not. Do you know anything about weather control, or how that would even be scientifically feasible? Probably not either. The point is, there is a trend I see with people that believe these bogus conspiracy theories is that they are so sure that they are true, but when you ask them to show you evidence they don't cannot give any scientific evidence to back those claims. Just like some people never believe any conspiracies (and trust me I am not one one of them, because there are some, that are backed with EVIDENCE that I do believe) people like you will believe ALL conspiracy theories even with the evidence is completely lacking. How is that better than people that don't believe anything? You belioeve anything you hear even when there is no evidence to back it uo just because it's a conspiracy? I am not for or against any conspiracy theory, I am for the truth. And the truth is there is no scientific evidence that weather control at this scale is scientifically possible. If there is evidence, I am all ears.

 

[HappyMonday]

Goodness sakes honey. If you're looking for a fight, stick your head in your *ss and fight for air.

I'm just answering your question. Now, the species of Earth human is quite the mix of galactic (maybe even universal) genetics, so, yep, it's kind of about how much of more recent non-Earth-human genetics are involved with some "people".

Yeah, I suppose you could call ETs "people" too, but I was making the point that they are not all (Earth) "humans".

They can still act like pigs though if they'd like and so can humans.

And I guess some non Earth species may be very closely related to us and might be more human-like than even some of those we see as human that live here. Am I using the term "people" properly in a more galactic sense? Perhaps not.

But your use of "pig" is not how I used the word "pig." I meant pig as literally the species - pig. You're using it in a derogatory sense.

My use of "people - use that term loosely" was not derogatory but actually quite literal, as in, I meant that not all of them are the species human, regardless of how they act and what they look like. That's all I'm saying.

I'm sorry, I believe this is nonsense, but you're absolutely entitled to your opinion and I respect that. I'll digress.

 

[Unregistered]

Debunking is about removing bunk, it's not about proving the opposite. It's bout looking at the EVIDENCE and seeing if it's bunk or not.

I demonstrated that the storm moved as it was expected to move. I explained why it moved like this. I noted the lack of evidence for steering. I explained the small effect HAARP has, and how far away it is.

That's not the same thing as proving the opposite, but if you take your divine revelation out of the equation, then what actually is the evidence you think I've not debunked?

"... how far away it is... " HA HA HA. And... "the small effect HAARP has..."

A butterfly flaps its wings...

We are influenced by things OFF PLANET in a big way, why in the hell would something ON the planet be "far away"?


The subtle is VERY significant. But... I see you are not addressing my comments on spirituality, so perhaps you have absolutely ZERO clue about subtle energies. You dismiss effects because you can't "see" them or they are so small. Tsk, tsk. Sounds like some major assuming going on there. And you dare to beg and plead for evidence. Who needs evidence when you thing that the other side of the planet doesn't affect weather and things bounced off the atmosphere doesn't affect weather and the "little things" don't count. Yeah, that's what she said... to you. lol

"But it was such a BIG machine, I didn't think that dropping that small wrench in it would change a thing."

 

[Just saying...]

I'm sorry, this is nonsense. I'll digress.

I wish I could argue that one but I cannot. I'm talking apples and you're talking oranges. You digressed from the first thing you said, as in, you turned aside the main topic of discussion. I explained to you what I meant by my comment but you won't hear.

I've known through our entire discussion that we are not using terms in the same way and have done my best to get you to see that also, but you have an agenda, a point to make, that has nothing to do with the point I was making and that's why it felt (to you) like this was going in circles. You don't understand what I am telling you because it is beyond your paradigm. Gosh, who'd ever consider that not all things that look human are human.

I totally understand everything you've said, but you are not talking about the same topic I am and I am not letting you put words in my mouth. I was not saying humans are not humans based on how they act. I repeated to you that a species is a species. A dog is still a dog even if it bites another dog. But that was not my point with that comment that set you off. You want to make it your point and you can do that if you'd like but you cannot and will not twist my words into something that I did not mean.

So, yep, I too digress off of your digression.

 

[Met Watch]

Well, there's your answer. In your world, HAARP didn't play a role in this. Your mind is set. End of discussion for you. Why are you asking for others to prove to you what is self-evident to them. If you don't want to believe it, no one is saying you have to. Stay asleep. Your right of free-will guarantees you can.

Yes, the meteorological explanation for what Sandy did is completely wrong because HAARP had to be involved. I'm sorry, but I've lost any hope to have a reasonable discussion about this. Seriously, people, learn a little bit about how our atmosphere works.

 

[Met Watch]

The burden of "proof", or more importantly, TRUTH - for YOU - lies quite firmly on YOUR shoulders. It always has, it always will. I already went over that - no one else can determine proof or truth for you.

I see that Mick started this thread. He is not writing his comments on someone else's thread about HAARP being part of what caused Sandy and other weather things. So, using your logic, then where is Mick's proof that HAARP was NOT involved?

Wrong. You made the claim, so you have to present the evidence - which is severely lacking. We already have the meteorological evidence - charts, satellite loops, etc. Our explanation - there was major blocking to the east of the storm that forced the system west into the coast. The radar "flash" is a switch to precip mode - which is well documented and - get this - WIDELY ACCEPTED.

And we can't prove a negative. However, as some of you seem to forget, "I can't prove it" does not mean "You're right."

 

[Mick West]

"... how far away it is... " HA HA HA. And... "the small effect HAARP has..."

A butterfly flaps its wings...

We are influenced by things OFF PLANET in a big way, why in the hell would something ON the planet be "far away"?


The subtle is VERY significant. But... I see you are not addressing my comments on spirituality, so perhaps you have absolutely ZERO clue about subtle energies. You dismiss effects because you can't "see" them or they are so small. Tsk, tsk. Sounds like some major assuming going on there. And you dare to beg and plead for evidence. Who needs evidence when you thing that the other side of the planet doesn't affect weather and things bounced off the atmosphere doesn't affect weather and the "little things" don't count. Yeah, that's what she said... to you. lol

"But it was such a BIG machine, I didn't think that dropping that small wrench in it would change a thing."

Billions of butterflies are flapping their wings right now. What happens?

We're talking about evidence here - not personal theories about aliens and the divine. Do you have any actual evidence?

 

[Mick West]

Politeness reminder:

I would greatly appreciate it if commenters would be polite to one another, and constructive in their criticism.

Any comments that contain insults, direct or implied, may be edited or removed.

This does not mean you should avoid telling people they are wrong, simply that you be polite about it, and that youexplain why they are wrong. As a general rule of thumb, imagine you are talking to a new friend of a close relative, and be as polite as you would in that situation.

 

[Unregistered]

Now she is using that word, "the masses...". Dehumanization again.
Hey, guest, you are Revmichelle, right? You can be yourself here, even if we are just stupid seething inhuman masses of ignorant flesh.
Break it all down for us. We need to know where you stand. Don't be shy.

Now now, play nice. Shouldn't take advantage of the unstable elements no matter how tempting lol.

 

[Just saying...]

Wrong. You made the claim, so you have to present the evidence - which is severely lacking. We already have the meteorological evidence - charts, satellite loops, etc. Our explanation - there was major blocking to the east of the storm that forced the system west into the coast. The radar "flash" is a switch to precip mode - which is well documented and - get this - WIDELY ACCEPTED.

And we can't prove a negative. However, as some of you seem to forget, "I can't prove it" does not mean "You're right."

"Our explanation - there was major blocking to the east of the storm that forced the system west into the coast."

And what was that "major blocking"? What was it and what caused it? Maybe it was something small and oh, so far away, like on the other side of the continent? The weather is a world-wide, a world sized system. If I remember right, Alaska and the east coast are in that same weather system.

Furthermore, Alaska is not the only location for such technology. There's one in Puerto Rico also. (Is that close enough for you Mick?)

Yep, and just cuz you all can't get the so-called "proof" (whatever that is) that you're screaming for, doesn't mean you're right either.

 

[Mick West]

"Our explanation - there was major blocking to the east of the storm that forced the system west into the coast."

And what was that "major blocking"? What was it and what caused it? Maybe it was something small and oh, so far away, like on the other side of the continent? The weather is a world-wide, a world sized system. If I remember right, Alaska and the east coast are in that same weather system.

Furthermore, Alaska is not the only location for such technology. There's one in Puerto Rico also. (Is that close enough for you Mick?)

Yep, and just cuz you all can't get the so-called "proof" (whatever that is) that you're screaming for, doesn't mean you're right either.

People are asking for evidence.

The major blocking was explained in the first post.

 

[Just saying...]

Billions of butterflies are flapping their wings right now. What happens?

We're talking about evidence here - not personal theories about aliens and the divine. Do you have any actual evidence?

I didn't start the ET digression. I just made an off the cuff comment but someone wanted to grab that and go with it. And yet it was actually rather appropriate.

And the Divine is involved in everything. ETs are rather involved with all live on planet Earth also, past and present. None of us would be here without them and we wouldn't have to concern ourselves with weather modification if it weren't for the ETs that camped out here about 10,000 years ago and got all control-freak on everyone.

And yep, these things are absolutely all tied together, but you're being way too myopic so you can't see the big picture... and don't want to. And that's your problem. You can beg and plead to anyone and everyone for proof that you'll never accept as proof. The onus is on you. You want YOUR truth, that's up to YOU.


Well, here then, you seem to need something to do so you can watch this video about weather modification. You can see how easy, simple, quick and subtle little things can make a big difference. Then mix a bunch of easy, simple, quick and subtle little things together and see how much havoc one can wreak.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g4PtHqvFEmM

 

[Just saying...]

People are asking for evidence.

The major blocking was explained in the first post.

Oh... so it was big arrow drawn on a map that pushed Sandy into the coast. Now I see.

Now she is using that word, "the masses...". Dehumanization again.
Hey, guest, you are Revmichelle, right? You can be yourself here, even if we are just stupid seething inhuman masses of ignorant flesh.
Break it all down for us. We need to know where you stand. Don't be shy.

Who is Revmichelle? Obviously just another person who doesn't think like all you debunkers. OMG, could there possibly be more than one who doesn't think like you?

Are you not human? Really? Tell me about that.

I see you want to take the tact like the one before, but you are still not in the same conversation as I am. It's ok, you're in your own little world, they know you there.

People are asking for evidence.

The major blocking was explained in the first post.

I see that the video I gave you
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g4PtHqvFEmM
was not the complete interview that I watched a while back. You can go looking for the entire interview though, if you really care to. At the beginning of the more complete version, he explains how they created a cloud burst during the dry season in Vietnam. The rains washed out bridges that their bombs wouldn't. That was back in the late 60s, early 70s.

I knew many a farmer who talked about cloud seeding back then and yet now today Americans act like they've never heard such a thing. The United States of Amnesia.

 

[Mick West]

Oh... so it was big arrow drawn on a map that pushed Sandy into the coast. Now I see.

No, it was the high and low pressure systems in the North Atlantic. The arrows indicate the resultant steering winds.

 

[Just saying...]

No, it was the high and low pressure systems in the North Atlantic. The arrows indicate the resultant steering winds.

Well, if that diagram is very accurate, I'll use your argument.... those high and low pressure systems are rather far away to be pushing that hurricane into the coast. And the wind should move from high to low. And again, that resulting wind is a long ways away from that hurricane.

Now, if you'd like to argue that the low from the arctic air pushing down the jetstream was drawing the hurricane towards it, I might buy that one. So, even if the systems involved created this situation all on their own, your diagram does absolutely nothing to back up that theory.


And... HAARP too can create highs and low which in turn can push and pull the jetstream. You may be defeating your purpose here.

 

[Mick West]

Well, if that diagram is very accurate, I'll use your argument.... those high and low pressure systems are rather far away to be pushing that hurricane into the coast. And the wind should move from high to low. And again, that resulting wind is a long ways away from that hurricane.

Now, if you'd like to argue that the low from the arctic air pushing down the jetstream was drawing the hurricane towards it, I might buy that one. So, even if the systems involved created this situation all on their own, your diagram does absolutely nothing to back up that theory.

And... HAARP too can create highs and low which in turn can push and pull the jetstream. You may be defeating your purpose here.

There's no evidence that HAARP can create highs and lows, and certainly no evidence it created these. There is nothing unexplained about them.

The diagram is illustrative. Winds go around pressure systems, clockwise around highs, and counter clockwise around lows. This is what all the meteorologists were predicting days in advance. Here's a more technical chart showing the wind directions (the barbs). Note this is an Oct 25th forecast for Oct 29. Four days in advance.

That's from the following link, which has a step by step account of how the weather systems steered Sandy into the coast:
http://dcstorms.com/2012/10/25/october-2012-ingredients-for-superstorm/

 

[Just playing...]

There's no evidence that HAARP can create highs and lows, and certainly no evidence it created these. There is nothing unexplained about them.

The diagram is illustrative. Winds go around pressure systems, clockwise around highs, and counter clockwise around lows. This is what all the meteorologists were predicting days in advance. Here's a more technical chart showing the wind directions (the barbs). Note this is an Oct 25th forecast for Oct 29. Four days in advance.

That's from the following link, which has a step by step account of how the weather systems steered Sandy into the coast:
http://dcstorms.com/2012/10/25/october-2012-ingredients-for-superstorm/

Yep. Weather happens. I'm not saying that natural weather systems cannot and do not create such situations. Like I said, it's just amazing that people can wake up to a changing climate, which they've been in denial of for years, let alone have to wrench their minds open to weather manipulation, which is not new by any means. It happens too. Why do you have such a problem wrapping your mind around such things existing? It's not even much of a stretch. Not at all. Is it because you can't "see" it? It's invisible radio waves? Do you think your cell phone is not really working too? Your radio? Your TV. These things must just seem magical to you.

HAARP can influence and steer along natural systems and that would be ideal anyway so it continues to look all natural.


I told you where I got my information... from a much higher perspective than any satellite or expert. And I'll continue to encourage you to do the same. Then threads like yours can go away because you won't care what anyone else says or thinks or be demanding information from them. I don't know why you do anyway. Answer this for me - what's it to ya? Why do you have anything invested in this? So, you think people are whack for thinking that HAARP is being used for weather modification, amongst other things.... ok, so let 'em be whack. There are many people who are whack about a whole lot more than that, so why is it so important for Mick to "debunk" this. (Why is it called debunking when you're mostly just saying "bunk"?)

 

[Just playing...]

There's no evidence that HAARP can create highs and lows, and certainly no evidence it created these. There is nothing unexplained about them.

The diagram is illustrative. Winds go around pressure systems, clockwise around highs, and counter clockwise around lows. This is what all the meteorologists were predicting days in advance. Here's a more technical chart showing the wind directions (the barbs). Note this is an Oct 25th forecast for Oct 29. Four days in advance.


That's from the following link, which has a step by step account of how the weather systems steered Sandy into the coast:
http://dcstorms.com/2012/10/25/october-2012-ingredients-for-superstorm/

Face it Mick, you don't have a good enough grasp on weather, no one does, to account for every little detail, for every butterfly wing flap. You point to highs and lows causing the steering of hurricanes, but what caused those highs and lows, and not just highs and lows in general but any specific high and low. What ultimately causes each specific weather event? Is it the sun? Oh wait, the sun is an AWFUL long ways away, so according to you, that can't happen. The world is turning, but that's GOT to be a very small effect, so according to you, can't happen. Small and distant don't count in your reality of weather. That's a very delusional reality dear. Sorry, no offense, but it's just not realistic.

 

[Mick West]

God telling you something is not evidence.

There's simply no evidence that weather modification was involved here. I'm quite open to the possibility, but I'd like to see some evidence. Otherwise why not go with aliens, or god, or Muslims, or the Yakuza controlling the storm, if you think I should be entertaining possibilites with no evidence.

 

[Mick West]

Face it Mick, you don't have a good enough grasp on weather, no one does, to account for every little detail, for every butterfly wing flap. You point to highs and lows causing the steering of hurricanes, but what caused those highs and lows, and not just highs and lows in general but any specific high and low. What ultimately causes each specific weather event? Is it the sun? Oh wait, the sun is an AWFUL long ways away, so according to you, that can't happen. The world is turning, but that's GOT to be a very small effect, so according to you, can't happen. Small and distant don't count in your reality of weather. That's a very delusional reality dear. Sorry, no offense, but it's just not realistic.

Meteorologists have a reasonable understanding of what creates the weather, and it's based on observations, and predictions that come true based on that model. Ultimately it's the sun and the motion of the earth (solar heating and Coriolis forces). We can predict the weather with a pretty high degree of accuracy - which demonstrates that the models are roughly correct. Or course they diverge over time, due to the sensitive dependence on initial conditions. But we get pretty good five day forecasts.

And the sun may be far away, but it's very large.

 

[Just saying...]

God telling you something is not evidence.

There's simply no evidence that weather modification was involved here. I'm quite open to the possibility, but I'd like to see some evidence. Otherwise why not go with aliens, or god, or Muslims, or the Yakuza controlling the storm, if you think I should be entertaining possibilites with no evidence.

LOL. So, if you have no evidence for something, it doesn't exist?

So many people have said that the world is heating because of global warming. And yet other planets in this system are also heating up. And that heating is more than what can come from our also warming sun. The heat in these planets is coming from within the planet. Trace it back far enough and it is from the influence of other dimensions on the 3rd dimension that Mick can "see." And yet many people will blame car emissions for the Earth warming up and yet I sincerely doubt that our car emissions are causing Jupiter to heat from the inside out. So-called "evidence" can be deceiving, especially when you've already got your mind made up.

And, just like the picture on your TV screen is evidence of the signal, it doesn't let you see that signal going through the air. And would you recognize the evidence if you saw it? If it were blatant would you still deny it?


You still didn't answer my question? What's it to ya? Why is this so near and dear to you? I can see the other side of this issue, the people saying that HAARP is causing such. If HAARP and other things are being used to manipulate weather, there are MANY reasons why someone would see that as important for people to know (both good and bad) and henceforth they'd like to give people half a chance at knowing this. I can see how, if this goes on, that people would feel a threat by it. I also know that simply knowing about something, having it enter your conscious awareness helps to keep you from being negatively influenced by it.

But what drives Mick to come and post (on how many issues?) on a debunking site? So, people think these things. Why does that affect you? What's in it for you? What threat do such people thinking such things offer to Mick? Why invest so much time and energy to prove these people wrong? Many people aren't even aware of HAARP's existence at all so, if it's not being used for weather modification, what does it matter?

What's it to ya? Really. I'm not asking a rhetorical question that I am trying to imply anything or make any point, I'm honestly asking you, Mick, what drives you to post such things and invest so much time and energy into it. What's in it for you?

Meteorologists have a reasonable understanding of what creates the weather, and it's based on observations, and predictions that come true based on that model. Ultimately it's the sun and the motion of the earth (solar heating and Coriolis forces). We can predict the weather with a pretty high degree of accuracy - which demonstrates that the models are roughly correct. Or course they diverge over time, due to the sensitive dependence on initial conditions. But we get pretty good five day forecasts.

And the sun may be far away, but it's very large.

And the "weather man" is notorious for getting it wrong, over and over and over. We flat EXPECT them to get it wrong, that's how consistently they get it wrong.

"Or course they diverge over time, due to the sensitive dependence on initial conditions." And small and distant effects. You're making my case for me again.


And HAARP is not as big as the sun, but it's WAY CLOSER! And it's not random, it's directed, it's by design, with intention.

Meteorologists have a reasonable understanding of what creates the weather, and it's based on observations, and predictions that come true based on that model. Ultimately it's the sun and the motion of the earth (solar heating and Coriolis forces). We can predict the weather with a pretty high degree of accuracy - which demonstrates that the models are roughly correct. Or course they diverge over time, due to the sensitive dependence on initial conditions. But we get pretty good five day forecasts.

And the sun may be far away, but it's very large.

Here's some more reading for you. You seem to need something to do with your time, so what the heck.

http://beforeitsnews.com/conspiracy-theories/2012/10/hurricane-sandy-and-haarp-2445686.html

Meteorologists have a reasonable understanding of what creates the weather, and it's based on observations, and predictions that come true based on that model. Ultimately it's the sun and the motion of the earth (solar heating and Coriolis forces). We can predict the weather with a pretty high degree of accuracy - which demonstrates that the models are roughly correct. Or course they diverge over time, due to the sensitive dependence on initial conditions. But we get pretty good five day forecasts.

And the sun may be far away, but it's very large.

Seriously Mick, why do you do this? You're not providing any new information. You are parroting all the weather men out there. I don't need your site to provide any of this info, I can turn on any mainstream media source and get that info.

I am most certainly not going to get info about HAARP, concerning even its existence, let alone it's use for weather, geophysical and emotion manipulation, etc. from the evening news, so, I can see why people who have info about it feel a need to put it out.

But why does Mick feel a need to parrot mainstream media information that is so readily available to anyone and everyone from many, many points of contact, all of which almost anyone who is alive at all is aware of. Yep, people know the weather report exists on the TV news - both people who know about HAARP and those who don't, know about the weather report on the evening news. They know about the weather channel and can go look at their station or site.

Your information is not informative and is completely redundant. It'd be like me copying the dictionary onto my own website. That's silly and a complete waste of time and energy.

Why do you do this?

 

[Met Watch]

Face it Mick, you don't have a good enough grasp on weather, no one does, to account for every little detail, for every butterfly wing flap. You point to highs and lows causing the steering of hurricanes, but what caused those highs and lows, and not just highs and lows in general but any specific high and low. What ultimately causes each specific weather event? Is it the sun? Oh wait, the sun is an AWFUL long ways away, so according to you, that can't happen. The world is turning, but that's GOT to be a very small effect, so according to you, can't happen. Small and distant don't count in your reality of weather. That's a very delusional reality dear. Sorry, no offense, but it's just not realistic.

Well, there are such things as cyclogenesis, frontogenesis, etc. that explain how low pressure systems and fronts form. As for the intensity of the storm, there is a concept called baroclinicity.

 

[Mick West]

But why does Mick feel a need to parrot mainstream media information that is so readily available to anyone and everyone from many, many points of contact, all of which almost anyone who is alive at all is aware of. Yep, people know the weather report exists on the TV news - both people who know about HAARP and those who don't, know about the weather report on the evening news. They know about the weather channel and can go look at their station or site.

Your information is not informative and is completely redundant. It'd be like me copying the dictionary onto my own website. That's silly and a complete waste of time and energy.

Why do you do this?

Because you asked:

And what was that "major blocking"? What was it and what caused it?

So I explained it.

 

[scombrid]

What ultimately causes each specific weather event? Is it the sun?

The sun, assymetric heat distribution, and coriolis force; mostly.

Small and distant don't count in your reality of weather.

The sun isn't small.

Small and distant might count but you've not got any evidence that the small an distant are being directed by "them". Plus, do you have any idea how infinitesimally small the energy in a weather radar or HAARP is compared to incoming from the sun?


You and others point at image glitches (like the RDU NEXRAD running in clear-air mode for a single scan after being off-line) which you insist are "energy" or "frequency" being fired into the storm as evidence of the storm being steered/strengthened/weakened/(whatever post hoc claim works at the time). But the reality is that the storm isn't steered from within. Hurricanes are relatively small and are steered by the weather around them. This hurricane seemingly got huge but it was really a big nor'easter that absorbed a hurricane. Aside from the fact that the supposed "flashes" such as in Raleigh are radar artifacts and not something external to the radar being detected by the radar, you and none of the others have offered evidence that the blocking pattern was engineered. That blocking pattern has been prominent since mid-2009.