"Geoengineering And The Collapse Of Earth 2014", a Dane Wigington presentation

[FuzzyUK]

‪
This lecture appears to have taken place on 13 January 2014 and published on YouTube on 5 Feb 2014.


After introducing himself Dane Wigington states:

00:05 ... our purpose of the site (http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org) is to expose the issue of Global Climate Engineering, otherwise termed as Geoengineering.

00:38 When we have films that we can clearly see are spraying, there's no denying that jet is spraying. Period.

00:44 We have interior footage which I will show in a moment, but the bottom line is that's not a condensation trail. Any notion that is, is is simply denial or complete ignorance.

00:57 You can even see in this jet, each side of the plane the plumes are different lengths, which means the nozzles are not aligned perfectly. You see different composition in the trail also indicative of different materials being expelled from different portions of the aircraft. So again, this amount to Weather Warfare. Period

Content from external source

My question: How does Dane conclude that different materials are being expelled from the aircraft?

 

[Balance]

Well, you would have to debate it with him, but from those clips he says he can see it. Period.

 

[Mick West]

There's a vast amount in that video, pretty much all of which has been addressed elsewhere. The trails he shows in the first minute are an aerodynamic contrail in patchy air, and then a hybrid contrail.

Aerodynamic contrails:
http://contrailscience.com/aerodynamic-and-rainbow-contrails/

Why the trail is broken:
http://contrailscience.com/broken-contrails/

Hybrid contrails:
http://contrailscience.com/hybrid-contrails-a-new-classification/

Since the entire presentation is based on these misidentifications, there's not a lot of point progressing to the arguments he build upon them.

 

[Balance]

Watching/listening to that video, get to 49mins and Dane's showing a weather map and tells us; this map is of rainfall, most of the country higher than average rainfall but look at this bullseye right above California - no rain.

...the colours over California, that shading means (hesitation) increasing degrees of (pause for effect) no rain

Content from external source

Sorry, but [...] That's class!

 

[Mick West]

Watching/listening to that video, get to 49mins and Dane's showing a weather map and tells us; this map is of rainfall, most of the country higher than average rainfall but look at this bullseye right above California - no rain.

...the colours over California, that shading means (hesitation) increasing degrees of (pause for effect) no rain

Content from external source

Sorry, but [...] That's class!

This again goes to Dane misinterpreting the probability maps:
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/de...-weather-temperature-probability-charts.3146/

Just like he did with the temperature he's making the same mistake with precipitation (rain/snow):


All the maps shows is the probability that the precipitation will be above or below normal for a five day period. It does not show the actual precipitation, nor does it indicate the decree of precipitation. It's also different from the "Probability of precipitation", which is the probability that it will rain.

http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/predictions/erf_info.php?outlook=610&var=p

The 6-10 day Outlook gives the confidence that a forecaster has, given as a probability, that the observed total precipitation, over upcoming days 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 will be in the range of one of three possible categories - below (B), median* (N), or above (A). For any calendar 5-day period, these categories can be defined by separating the 30 years of the climatology period, 1981-2010 (30 years), into the driest 10 years, the middle 10 years, and the wettest 10 years*.

Content from external source

These probability maps show great variation across the country, but this is all normal and expected.

 

[Hama Neggs]

‪
This lecture appears to have taken place on 13 January 2014 and published on YouTube on 5 Feb 2014.

Isn't that an image of where they used smoke trails to analyze wing vortex? If so, it sure is a stretch to call it "spraying".

 

[FuzzyUK]

Is Dane Wigington implying that chemtrail spraying is responsible for the large jet stream oscillation, the Polar Vortex and recent severe bad weather on the East Coast of USA?

49:35 This illustrates again what I am talking about. Massive high pressure, they pump the moisture completely up into the Arctic Circle where they cool it down and push it back down and cool parts of the country while other parts fry. Again, California at minimum the climate sacrifice zone for the experiments they are carrying on further East.

Content from external source

 

[Mick West]

Yes he is.

But really we don't want to go through every claim in his video in one thread. Suffice to say it full of inaccuracies, and some are listed above. If anyone wants to debunk any individual claim, then please start a focussed thread.

 

[Balance]

Is Dane Wigington implying that chemtrail spraying is responsible for the large jet stream oscillation, the Polar Vortex and recent severe bad weather on the East Coast of USA?

What I got from the whole speech, is that Dane is claiming geo-engineering (he doesn't want to use the term chemtrails, instead preferring aerosolisation) which includes spraying and HAARP is being used to control the global weather systems in a bid to combat climate change but is further claiming that the net result is soon-to-be death and destruction of civilisation.

 

[Hama Neggs]

What I got from the whole speech, is that Dane is claiming geo-engineering (he doesn't want to use the term chemtrails, instead preferring aerosolisation) which includes spraying and HAARP is being used to control the global weather systems in a bid to combat climate change but is further claiming that the net result is soon-to-be death and destruction of civilisation.

The words "deep end" came to mind.

 

[Balance]

It's pretty much what Max is preaching, except Max seems to be saying the destruction is an evil intentional NWO depopulation agenda, where the government itself is being duped into doing the geoengineering in the mistaken belief it will combat climate change.

 

[Steve Funk]

Isn't that an image of where they used smoke trails to analyze wing vortex? If so, it sure is a stretch to call it "spraying".

Has anyone done an image search on that image?

 

[Mick West]

Has anyone done an image search on that image?

It's ancient, from the 1970s
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/about/Organizations/Technology/Facts/TF-2004-14-DFRC.html

 

[Mick West]

Here's another:


And from 1973:

 

[George B]

Is Dane Wigington implying that chemtrail spraying is responsible for the large jet stream oscillation, the Polar Vortex and recent severe bad weather on the East Coast of USA?

49:35 This illustrates again what I am talking about. Massive high pressure, they pump the moisture completely up into the Arctic Circle where they cool it down and push it back down and cool parts of the country while other parts fry. Again, California at minimum the climate sacrifice zone for the experiments they are carrying on further East.

Content from external source

Hmmmm, seems like he is stealing concepts from the arctic amplification group.
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/the-effect-of-arctic-amplification-on-weather-patterns.3179/

 

[Soulfly]

Can someone explain what he means by collapse?
An economic collapse or the weight of all that aluminum is finally going to collapse the Earth in on itself?

 

[Mick West]

Can someone explain what he means by collapse?
An economic collapse or the weight of all that aluminum is finally going to collapse the Earth in on itself?

Collapse of the environment, by the methane.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clathrate_gun_hypothesis