I've said it before: cloud seeding is one thing, that's what was done in Indochina during the war ('60s-'70s). Controlling the weather, engineering storms, creating winds,....that requires moving massive amounts of air around, with numerous feedback consequences the best computer out there could not calculate, due to the impossibility of…
I've said it before: cloud seeding is one thing, that's what was done in Indochina during the war ('60s-'70s). Controlling the weather, engineering storms, creating winds,....that requires moving massive amounts of air around, with numerous feedback consequences the best computer out there could not calculate, due to the impossibility of collecting the data from every single spot in the world (land, ocean, air) and accounting for every single living organism on the planet.. The global weather/climate system is not a machine, it is an organism, an indeterminate open system, while machines are closed systems .
Yes and that does not count as proof or disproof. We need to make that distinction. Plenty of open biological systems are subject to manipulation. And we do not know what technology was confiscated from Tesla's labs. So in my school of investigative reporting, this goes in the middle column -- indeterminate. It's the most important of the three. The enterprise of seeking the truth of a matter requires flexibility, and a balance of credulity and incredulity. Most of all, we must honestly consider observed phenomena from all points of view. And we must consider admissions by entities (such as New World Vistas) at face value first.
Manipulation is remote from engineering. The latter requires *predictable* results. How predictable have been the results of GMOs? And admissions of what? Plans to do this and that? How many plans have been announced regarding "bio-weapons"? Which is more complex, the global weather system or the biology of individual organisms?
Jeff, there is no debate here; it would be speculative. We are still in what I call the center column — that which is unknown. It's good to make peace with that, because it's a very large category.
I've said it before: cloud seeding is one thing, that's what was done in Indochina during the war ('60s-'70s). Controlling the weather, engineering storms, creating winds,....that requires moving massive amounts of air around, with numerous feedback consequences the best computer out there could not calculate, due to the impossibility of collecting the data from every single spot in the world (land, ocean, air) and accounting for every single living organism on the planet.. The global weather/climate system is not a machine, it is an organism, an indeterminate open system, while machines are closed systems .
Yes and that does not count as proof or disproof. We need to make that distinction. Plenty of open biological systems are subject to manipulation. And we do not know what technology was confiscated from Tesla's labs. So in my school of investigative reporting, this goes in the middle column -- indeterminate. It's the most important of the three. The enterprise of seeking the truth of a matter requires flexibility, and a balance of credulity and incredulity. Most of all, we must honestly consider observed phenomena from all points of view. And we must consider admissions by entities (such as New World Vistas) at face value first.
Manipulation is remote from engineering. The latter requires *predictable* results. How predictable have been the results of GMOs? And admissions of what? Plans to do this and that? How many plans have been announced regarding "bio-weapons"? Which is more complex, the global weather system or the biology of individual organisms?
Jeff, there is no debate here; it would be speculative. We are still in what I call the center column — that which is unknown. It's good to make peace with that, because it's a very large category.
btw I am much less interested in weather control then I am in these laser or microwave thingies.
You might ask Michael Janitch about Nexrad radar and how they use it to induce heat domes, for example, and steer/dissipate/accentuate storms.