Debunked: Hurricane Sandy, Chemtrails, HAARP and Conspiracy Theories

[Just saying...]

Because you asked:



So I explained it.

You keep dodging my question. You know what I'm asking you - why do you post debunking to such things? What's it to ya? All you use for information is what is already readily available through the mainstream. There is absolutely no use for what you are doing.

That's the last time I ask. If you don't care to answer, your non-answer is quite the answer in and of itself. Dodge away.

 

[Mick West]

You keep dodging my question. You know what I'm asking you - why do you post debunking to such things? What's it to ya? All you use for information is what is already readily available through the mainstream. There is absolutely no use for what you are doing.

That's the last time I ask. If you don't care to answer, your non-answer is quite the answer in and of itself. Dodge away.

Explained here:

https://www.metabunk.org/content/122-Why-Debunk

and:

https://www.metabunk.org/content/129-A-Guide-to-Debunking

 

[Just saying...]

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



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.

Prove it! LOL A blocking pattern has been where since 2009? Weather modification, in some form, has been going on at least since the '60s. New things keep getting added. So, what exactly is your point?

I don't have any problem with natural weather. It happens. Hell, it's most everyone else out there who fights the reality of weather, natural or modified - "that could never happen". Millions of people are having to face that harsh reality now. I don't know why you people fight people who talk about the existence of weather modification. What's it to ya?

Honey, I'm not saying that "small and distant" being insignificant is how I think. I'm poking fun at Mick for dismissing small and distant influences as being insignificant. Do keep up.

And why does anyone need to answer your pleas for "evidence." People put out info on what they think and you can either accept it or not. Whatever "evidence" they have, they have presented. Obviously, by seeing you all go on here, what has been presented does not constitute "proof" to you. Which was my point many posts ago.

Why start a thread about it? If you think that what they are saying is hooey, then let it be hooey. I don't understand (and Mick doesn't seem to want to explain, maybe you'd care to) what you all have invested in fighting these people who you think are full of hooey. What's it to ya? What harm are their posts causing?

If HAARP IS being used for the things they say it is, then I can easily see why they want people to know. People are being needlessly harmed by HAARP. That's why people post such.

What is your motive for posting threads that tell them to "prove" anything, which I established right from the beginning, is not anyone's responsibility, nor within their power to "prove" anything to anyone. YOUR truth lies firmly on YOUR shoulders. No one else can determine YOUR truth. That is YOUR responsibility. People believe what they want to. Speaking of evidence, you're evidence of that. So, someone says Sandy was steered by HAARP. So. If that's bunk, no one needs you to tell them that. Who the f are you? No really. And you present what as YOUR so-called evidence? - information that is available to anyone and everyone through the mainstream - no one needs you to provide this info, it's provided many times over, delivered on a silver platter. What use are you? What use is this thread? It's not informative. It's just taking up space. Why do it?

 

[Just saying...]

Explained here:

https://www.metabunk.org/content/122-Why-Debunk

and:

https://www.metabunk.org/content/129-A-Guide-to-Debunking

Yes, all good points and good reasons to debunk... the mainstream. The mainstream is biased and people need to be made aware of that.

But what good does it do for you to present as information, as your so-called "proof" info that is readily available through the mainstream. There's an endless supply of that information. No one needs Mick for this.

So, yep, you just need something to do. I see that.

 

[Mick West]

Yes, all good points and good reasons to debunk... the mainstream. The mainstream is biased and people need to be made aware of that.

But what good does it do for you to present as information, as your so-called "proof" info that is readily available through the mainstream. There's an endless supply of that information. No one needs Mick for this.

Then why exactly were you here asking questions about the hurricane?

 

[MikeC]

Prove it! LOL A blocking pattern has been where since 2009?

Here you go.

In the North Atlantic, atmospheric blocking centers generally form over Greenland and Western Europe. A blocking event that took place over Greenland in the winter of late 2009 and early 2010 ultimately led to intense blizzards in the eastern United States, in an episode popularly known as Snowmageddon .

And of course these events are not actually new at all -

The team removed the effect that global warming has on water temperatures, and found that blocking events occurred up to 30 percent more often from the 1930s to the 1960s and during a period that started in the late 1990s to the present, all times when the North Atlantic Ocean was warmer than usual.

Weather modification, in some form, has been going on at least since the '60s.

1940's actually, in the modern sense.

Are you telling us you think that weather modification since the 1960's has created the large scale atmospheric conditions that have existed over Nth America & the Atlantic since at least 2009?

Despite evidence that such conditions have existed long before any "modern" weather modification efforts (as opposed to religious/cultural types - "rain dances" and the like), and by implication have happened every now and then pretty much forever?

What is your evidence to supoprt hat, or whatever it is that you are actually telling us?

 

[Jay Reynolds]

Thanks to R3zn8d, DAWdesign, Tatoott1009, Bethanyhome7, WaronerrorDkos, ConservitusPrime, and MANY other researchers who put in long hours monitoring these events.

R3zn8d, do you associate with this dutchsinse?

This is a legitimate question which deserves an answer.

 

[Unregistered]

HI,

I don't know any of you and what you like to do with your lives but I came onto this thread by chance I suppose. I hope that maybe I can offer some insight:

first off, the debate appears to be loosely "academic" in that it has a lot of science-nous, or science-nosity as you like. I do believe the post made by resin8te, as well as his website http://rezn8d.net/2012/11/02/geoengineering-frankenstorm-hurricane-sandy-afwws-pt1/ , make a fairly valid distinction between tin hat conspiracy theories (the owners of which we all love to get a nice superiority boost from invalidating,) and what IS an actual concern which would be the technology and it's capabilities that are actively being developed with alarming success. It appears to me, as an outsider of this thread that the above link changes the tone somewhat as it makes a very rational case for showing these abilities are being realistically pursued and likely have been obtained by varying degrees. If you consider a theory like the existence of aliens, and put it alongside the idea that Sandy had a degree of modification, the latter has a realistic probability. So in the end, the debate isn't scientific, it's social. Ultimately, Mick is asking for proof of a crime. Now I would have to say to mick here... do u think if anyone had proof of such a crime that your thread would be the place to come? Certainly not mick. aha. But really, if proof of such a crime did exist, who, really would you turn to? I mean an international court? hmmmm. I agree with you mick that the possibility of course, exists that prevailing winds created this freakish storm the likes of which we have never seen. Or climate change maybe. This is all possible.

But in light of the information Reson8t posted i would bring to mind a couple of things. First, TNT was developed by a Farmer to reduce workload and improve quality of life. Einstein helped the atomic bomb because he believed it would stop the war (nevermind that it was the ultimate science experiment purely from an entertainment perspective.) So in considering that when a powerful technology is developed by a scientist to "help" people it may be multifaceted. And if one of these facets were to be dangerous it may be commandeered by the military complex, as in the case of haarp, which certainly isn't run by NOAAH.

So in the end Mick is right. No one on this thread has provided the direct evidence of said crime. That is, that no one has shown a smoking gun which says these recently developed technologies have been used in the case of Sandy. Though if someone had such a smoking gun, i would be a little frightened for THEm. that's for sure.ahaha.
Actually, I would be a little frightened for all of us. That's why when I go to these little conspiracy sites like the http://www.haarpstatus.com/status.html one or whatever with the little rotating atlas .gif and "donate" button which has Harp sensors all over the continental US (and apparently chemtrail ones as well??) It simply makes me feel better. It makes things easier that there are simply just crazies out there and Hurricanes are a well explained phenomena. And that if we ignore it, the weird little things that bother us about human nature and history, you know things like murder, destruction, war (in all it's facets) domination, torture and sadism, and senseless control... oooh and let me add slavery and rape on there. WEll these things just happen, the same way as a hurricane does. They aren't propagated by twisted and criminal individuals. They're just the way things are.

Obviously I'm being sarcastic here. But let me say this one last thing,... science is A-moral but doesn't escape the realm of ethics (simply because we live in the same realm, not in star trek or on a hard drive.) Sooooo if any of the good chums on this thread actually do have any real geological training or experience on hurricanes. Remember YOU"VE GOT M* F* OBLIGATIONS to your fellow man..

So. Have a nice day all

 

[Belfrey]

Yes, all good points and good reasons to debunk... the mainstream. The mainstream is biased and people need to be made aware of that.

But what good does it do for you to present as information, as your so-called "proof" info that is readily available through the mainstream. There's an endless supply of that information. No one needs Mick for this.

So, yep, you just need something to do. I see that.

The information used to debunk things like "chemtrails" certainly is readily available. But remarkably, people who believe in such things are often completely unaware of it. They accept and spread many claims which are easily proven false - some spread the misinformation knowingly, while for some it never occurs to them that it might be false. Sometimes when I mention the scientific literature about persistent contrails, a chemtrails believer will tell me, "There is no scientific literature about persistent contrails." I'm sure they believe that, although it takes about 30 seconds to show that they're wrong.

Debunk the mainstream, sure - if you can do so with real information. You can't debunk using bunk. There's a reason that fringe theories are on the fringe, it's because they're generally not supported with good evidence.

 

[MikeC]

HI,
.......If you consider a theory like the existence of aliens, and put it alongside the idea that Sandy had a degree of modification, the latter has a realistic probability......

so you say we should beleive it because it isn't as dodgy as aliens??

Personally I'm way more convinced that aliens exist than that anyone steered Sandy - just given the number of stars and apaprently planets in the universe - that is a solid foundation on which to construct a hypothesis based upon pure probabilities.

I can't say I think the same of claims that HAARP "might" do this or that.....

 

[Unregistered]

@ MikeC

Oh u mean like b/c the universe is infinite or something so that means the probability of a humanoid race of "space aliens" exists b/c NASA says so? There is another part of humans I should point out even though we all know it... humans lie. SOmetimes big. Even scientists. Altruism in science is one of the biggest hoaxes of the last three centuries. Science is only good as it's pragmatism and explanatory power, or epistemological "yield" if you will. By pragmatism I usually mean technology, or as the military apparatus might refer: toys.

Now then. Powerful toys that can do powerful things. These exist. Aliens. Not so much. Although you are welcome to postulate but it would simply be fantasy until you have a smoking gun for alien existence, probabalistic argumentation is just fancy nerd talk. Anyways a subset postulate of the idea that "because so many planets possibly exist within possibly infinite solar systems... yada yada yada" is that planets and universes create or "grow life?" Thusly your real argument looks like this:

A): Planets and universes grew the life and existence we experience,
B): there are an infinite number of planets and universes

C): Humanoid intelligent alien life similar to our own exists.


If A and B then C. So humanoid life similar to our own exists based on a deductive assumption that universes grow life.

. The probability aspect of the argument is strictly self referential. The argument is actually deductive at it's base, working on a hidden set of assumptions, then simply jumping to a set of completely unscientific set of conclusions without building any case whatsoever. Basically, it's a nerd gasm wet fantasy that Humanoid aliens exist. And I don't care how you postulate it sir,, I've heard all about it from Hawking's mouth himself. Pure nonsense.

SOOOOO, mister until you grow some f* humanoid aliens from a little model planet in a test tube or whatever and evolve them from monkeys, (oh and evolve trees to produce sticks and things in exactly the same format) then don't start getting all fact check-y on me. There is nothing scientific (Method) about your idea, OR logical, rational and definitely not statistical or inductive. It is purely cultural re-iteration. It's pop- science. Good day.

 

[scombrid]

Honey, I'm not saying that "small and distant" being insignificant is how I think. I'm poking fun at Mick for dismissing small and distant influences as being insignificant. Do keep up.

Your argument was plain enough. It is a strawman and a flimsy one at that.

 

[rezn8d]

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?

That's what debunkers do, focus on things they can try to explain away, while ignoring all the scary truths they cannot...
Not one person in this thread can explain to me why the DHS/ESRL workshop discussed hurricane mitigation with a picture of HAARP on the page.

from other thread....

Again, I fully admit in my articles, videos, and past two years of arguing with Dutch that at this point there still is no credible evidence that NEXRAD IS modifying the weather.
My video points out the obvious, they want to modify the weather, and, that coincidentally two hurricanes, two different years, two MIMIC microwave anomalies, and two NEXRAD flashes at the same NEXRAD station seems too coincidental.
The DHS/ESRL video has a slide discussing hurricane mitigation, with a picture of HAARP in the background. The USAF Weather Symposium docs from 1997 discuss weather modification in detail with a full page on HAARP, meaning the speaker had that slide up and spoke on how HAARP relates to the slide show's topic. Why then is it so hard to believe that if HAARP (a radar) can modify the weather, that a NEXRAD can't?

To me it seems highly unlikely that a 750,000 watt NEXRAD could modify the weather like the 5 gigawatt HAARP, but after reading that the MIRAGE microwave only uses 45kW and a rocket to make an artifical ionospheric mirror as HAARP does, the likelihood increases exponentially.

View attachment 1035

Then there's this:
ftp://ftp.bbso.njit.edu/pub/staff/pgoode/durip07/mozer-NSWP VSBX overview brief.ppt
Page 21

"Active Approach: Modify the system and/or environment in real-time"

Page 28
•RF transmissions generate effects observable from ULF (< 1 HZ) to UV (~1015Hz)
HAARP can make ultra-violet light?

 

[Mick West]

The DHS/ESRL video has a slide discussing hurricane mitigation, with a picture of HAARP in the background. The USAF Weather Symposium docs from 1997 discuss weather modification in detail with a full page on HAARP, meaning the speaker had that slide up and spoke on how HAARP relates to the slide show's topic.

Where are these two things?

 

[Chew]

•RF transmissions generate effects observable from ULF (< 1 HZ) to UV (~1015Hz)
HAARP can make ultra-violet light?

That's not what it said. "generate effects" is not the same as "make".

 

[Fourthmeal]

Hiding in plain sight is the only way the illusion can work.

 

[SR1419]

The USAF Weather Symposium docs from 1997 discuss weather modification in detail with a full page on HAARP, meaning the speaker had that slide up and spoke on how HAARP relates to the slide show's topic. Why then is it so hard to believe that if HAARP (a radar) can modify the weather, that a NEXRAD can't?


Then there's this:
ftp://ftp.bbso.njit.edu/pub/staff/pgoode/durip07/mozer-NSWP VSBX overview brief.ppt
Page 21

"Active Approach: Modify the system and/or environment in real-time"

The USAF 1997 doc refers to HAARP only as it relates to Space Weather and communications:

Your other link is also about Space weather...and doesn't mention terrestrial weather at all...its about the operating in space- above the atmosphere- for satellites etc..

Not trying to be difficult but I fail to see how any of this shows that HAARP can and is being used to control the weather.

 

[Mick West]

Here's the DHS thing (I've re-uploaded it with better audio)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ceaGCoFESro

It's in the original the Wil Laska segment at 7:00 Tuesday here: https://ams.confex.com/ams/17WModWMA/techprogram/programexpanded_492.htm ]

Ha, he has the HAARP picture there because he's talking about conspiracy theories he found on the internet about modifying the weather. From 04:53 in the video.

"the other side came from these maybe not so reputable groups on the fringes and supported by very secular groups, and they had this theory that Russia and the United Stated had the capability of controlling the weather, our means of doing it was through this system called HAARP, so that was, uh, that was interesting."

Debunked?

Here's the DHS HAARP mention with better audio:

​

So it's simply that when researching weather modification of the internet, he found lots of ("less reputable") mentions of HAARP. Big surprise.

 

[Chew]

That's what debunkers do, focus on things they can try to explain away, while ignoring all the scary truths they cannot...
Not one person in this thread can explain to me why the DHS/ESRL workshop discussed hurricane mitigation with a picture of HAARP on the page.

Ha, he has the HAARP picture there because he's talking about conspiracy theories he found on the internet about modifying the weather. From 04:53 in the video.

Oh, man! How embarrassing.

 

[rezn8d]

ESRL is Earth Sciences Research Lab... NASA

 

[rezn8d]

combined arguement over here: https://www.metabunk.org/posts/19063

 

[rezn8d]

Here's the DHS thing (I've re-uploaded it with better audio)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ceaGCoFESro

It's in the original the Wil Laska segment at 7:00 Tuesday here: https://ams.confex.com/ams/17WModWMA/techprogram/programexpanded_492.htm ]

Ha, he has the HAARP picture there because he's talking about conspiracy theories he found on the internet about modifying the weather. From 04:53 in the video.

"the other side came from these maybe not so reputable groups on the fringes and supported by very secular groups, and they had this theory that Russia and the United Stated had the capability of controlling the weather, our means of doing it was through this system called HAARP, so that was, uh, that was interesting."

Debunked?

Here's the DHS HAARP mention with better audio:

​

So it's simply that when researching weather modification of the internet, he found lots of ("less reputable") mentions of HAARP. Big surprise.

The fact this is even mentioned is more telling... Cohen said under oath there are weather weapons... yet this asshat scoffs and you think that proves that there is no such thing... I don't follow your logic.

 

[Mick West]

The fact this is even mentioned is more telling... Cohen said under oath there are weather weapons... yet this asshat scoffs and you think that proves that there is no such thing... I don't follow your logic.

My logic is that you asked someone to explain why the picture of HAARP was there, and so I explained it. That's it.

 

[Mick West]

Cohen said under oath there are weather weapons...

What? Where? Did he mention HAARP?

 

[SR1419]

The fact this is even mentioned is more telling... Cohen said under oath there are weather weapons... yet this asshat scoffs and you think that proves that there is no such thing... I don't follow your logic.

Actually- what is more telling is the fact that you use the inclusion of this photo in this presentation as "evidence" that HAARP can control the weather and challenged anyone to explain why it was included...and when it IS explained that it was included merely as an interesting aside- noting that "not so reputable groups on the fringes" had your theory...and you simply dismiss the explanation with an insult and denial...THAT is telling.

 

[scombrid]

Cohen said under oath there are weather weapons...

There's already a thread about Cohen's comments.

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/15...an-eco-type-of-terrorism-quot?highlight=cohen

 

[Jaysen]

There is NOTHING about requiring anything to be implanted.

Vice President of the United States Joe Biden to Justice Roberts talking about microscopic tags and implantation into human bodies..

"Our constitutional journey did not stop then and it must not stop now judge.. And we'll be faced with equally consequential decisions in the 21st Century.

Can a MICROSCOPIC TAG be IMPLANTED IN A PERSON'S BODY TO TRACK THEIR EVERY MOVEMENT? THERE'S ACTUAL DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT. You will rule on THAT, MARK my words, before your tenure is over. Can BRAIN SCANS be used to DETERMINE whether a PERSON is INCLINED TOWARD criminality or violent BEHAVIOR? YOU WILL RULE on THAT! (he actually bangs on the desk for added emphasis here)

..and judge I need to know whether you will be a justice who believes that the constitutional journey must continue to speak to these CONSEQUENTIAL DECISIONS or that we've gone far enough in protecting against GOVERNMENT INTRUSION into our AUTONOMY into the MOST PERSONAL DECISIONS we make.

Judge that's why THIS IS A CRITICAL MOMENT.

We already know Ron Paul has said on his website that hidden in the OBAMACARE plan is this chip mandate. Ron Paul should know a thing or two about what's going on in the government.. more than all of us here. I believe him.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8aWDMufcS3k << This is alluding to the pre-crime technology indefinite detention type thing (Christians will be detained. After all, Christians are the only ones it seems that see he is "the one" prophesied about in the Bible (and would be a threat).. BHO the King who does as he pleases until the time of the end)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrXCFEzuHCA << This is part of the Joe Biden speech for those who have not heard it yet.

I hope Americans are not surprised when it's instituted since they did tell us plainly it will come. Actually, they said first a ruling will have to be made whether it's constitutional or not.. then it will come. I'm pretty sure they will say it's okay to chip the population, of course after the false flag event. It will be major. I really don't want to speculate on what event would cause the population to accept such a thing but just know it will be all over the news. When it happens, know that you heard it here first. Think people think. Ask questions please. Connect dots, investigate.. Don't be so closed minded.

 

[Mick West]

Coincidence stuff moved to:
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/1158-Coincidences-Sandy-44-etc

 

[Cairenn]

Hurricane Erin was far off shore and headed out to the north Atlantic

http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/2001erin.html#FIG1

That is a common track for many hurricanes---it was no threat to land

 

[Jaysen]

Hurricane Erin was far off shore and headed out to the north Atlantic

http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/2001erin.html#FIG1

That is a common track for many hurricanes---it was no threat to land

Common track for many hurricanes?? Hurricanes move in a common fashion?? Sighs.. oh boy..

Cairenn, How many miles is far? How close does a hurricane have to be for it to be considered a threat?

I'm trying to understand where you are coming from. I'm sure an educated person as yourself can give me an answer. I find that the people visiting these forums are fairly knowledgeable on many things.

I'll await your response.

 

[SR1419]

Common track for many hurricanes?? Hurricanes move in a common fashion?? Sighs.. oh boy..

Actually, it IS common for hurricanes to track up the east coast and then veer right.

 

[hemi]

Common track for many hurricanes?? Hurricanes move in a common fashion?? .

They do. Here's the plots for all category 3+ hurricanes in the west Atlantic over the last five years. You'll see that most (not all, but most) follow a similar trajectory: originating in the tropics somewhere to the west of North Africa, swinging in to the Caribbean on a west-to-north-westerly path, before turning north along or parallel to the USA eastern seaboard, and then north-west, back out into the North Atlantic. Some are a bit chaotic and don't quite fit that pattern, but Erin 2001 very much did follow the 'typical' track.




You can experiment with creating your own sets here...

http://csc.noaa.gov/hurricanes/#

[edit - SR1419 beat me to it! I was too busy playing with the NOAA's very cool hurricane tracker tool]

 

[hemi]

In fact, now I read the thread through, I see Mick posted something similar way back here...

https://www.metabunk.org/posts/18795

 

[Cairenn]

It was going parallel to the coast and it was so far off shore that not even clouds from it were showing in New York. It might have been mentioned but no one would have remembered

 

[Landru]

Erin was almost 600NM from New York at 5:00AM EDT on 9/11. There was no way it would impact the terrorist attacks in any way. It had already started to turn. If you look at the track you can the heading early on was more on track for Boston.

 

[Jazzy]

Erin was almost 600NM from New York at 5:00AM EDT on 9/11. There was no way it would impact the terrorist attacks in any way. It had already started to turn. If you look at the track you can the heading early on was more on track for Boston.

I never checked that. Damn. Some, er, deluded people had me going for a while, once. We were galloping across the plain. Then they fell off their horses, and I woke up.

 

[scombrid]

It was going parallel to the coast and it was so far off shore that not even clouds from it were showing in New York. It might have been mentioned but no one would have remembered

Surfers remembered. Big stable calm high pressure was dominating the weather on the east coast. That meant that the swell arriving from Erin had great form and surfers from Florida to Long Island were having a great morning. Many Long Island and New Jersey surfers remember that day and the smoke in the distance well. The arrival of the swell from the distant storm did make the news here in Florida.

 

[Jaysen]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1xWjdYnpxUg&playnext=1&list=PLC11A961726C8C64C&feature=results_video

9/11 Morning Weather Reports | NYC Not Warned of Approaching Hurricane Erin




Does anyone know kids were being thought to sound out, Kite, Playing, Must, Hit, Steal?? while Bush sat and watched them.

When the kids say the words it sounds like kite, plane, must, hit, steel (not in that order).. eerie, huh? To metabunkers it's just another coincidence lol.

Lord knows I try to provide the information but it's on you to decide what to do with it.

To me I smell something fishy..


Looks like someone had foreknowledge.. Based on all the info I've dug up, I'm certain Bush knew of the attacks.


If the Simpsons knew before hand, then definitely the most powerful man in the world at the time, knew as well.

 

[Jaysen]

Funny how all the Hurricanes move that way, but SANDY coincidentally just so happened to not follow that pattern..

 

[Met Watch]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1xWjdYnpxUg&playnext=1&list=PLC11A961726C8C64C&feature=results_video

9/11 Morning Weather Reports | NYC Not Warned of Approaching Hurricane Erin




Does anyone know kids were being thought to sound out, Kite, Playing, Must, Hit, Steal?? while Bush sat and watched them.

When the kids say the words it sounds like kite, plane, must, hit, steel (not in that order).. eerie, huh? To metabunkers it's just another coincidence lol.

Lord knows I try to provide the information but it's on you to decide what to do with it.

To me I smell something fishy..

View attachment 1689
Looks like someone had foreknowledge.. Based on all the info I've dug up, I'm certain Bush knew of the attacks.

View attachment 1690
If the Simpsons knew before hand, then definitely the most powerful man in the world at the time, knew as well.

Regarding the weather reports - what part of "not going to affect us at all" do you not understand? Every single meteorologist understood that Erin was never going to be a threat to New York City. Not a single weather model sent it into New York City, but every model DID show it turning away from NYC.

Long story short, Erin was never a threat to NYC. There was no need to mention it. End of story.

Regarding your images, yes, I'm calling coincidence. You can dismiss me as a loon for saying that, but really, that's all it is.