ayevee8toryear

The default position is the default position, right or wrong.

Actually the default position is that it can be done, a quick Google search will establish that. Who you may palm off as nut jobs may be informed and concerned citizens. I am in the 'I am not so sure' category. Claiming it is impossible or moronic to believe weather modification is possible is the weakest and most pathetic conclusion... It is on the record.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_Modification_Convention

I do not claim it is definitely possible, I claim it is difficult to determine that it is impossible.

I guess they were just Lucky then? lol

You misinterpret the debate. You come on, start a thread stating how much of a moron and tin foil hatter Alex Jones is and I question your intent. I show you an interview Alex did with the guy that basically invented weather Warfare 50 years ago proving he has more information than you have to make claims with, while you say weather warfare does not exist. You say it is only possible o make isolated drizzle, then I show you evidence of the said fatal storms fulfilling military objectives during the Vietnam war. Please explain how you conclude that making tornadoes must be impossible if this type of massive manipulation was possible half a century ago? You concluded that he is a moron because you want to believe that, not because you know it for sure.

Everything is possible as far as I am concerned, the onus is on you to explain why it is not. I am quite content not knowing for sure. What I do know for sure is, that none of you have the information to say for sure that it is impossible. This is what I am questioning. I bet you are also an Atheist?

LOL, First you say it is only possible to cause some isolated drizzle, then I give you evidence of weather weapons intentionally causing massive rainfall during the dry season in Vietnam 50 years ago fulfilling a precise military objective. Then you go on to talk about energy required for a small nuclear weapon... Grasping at straws much? Nature has the energy stored and much like a nuclear explosion, that energy in not stored in a device or receptacle, only the catalyst is. I believe it is possible to entice the earths natural processes to intensify as Ben and company have demonstrated. Therefore I am open to the suggestion that tornadoes could be created. If you want to label people as nutcases for thinking differently to you, that is your prerogative. Your standpoint seems kinda negative to me. I will run in this instance with a great piece of advice that I like to run with to determine which way I will sway in conclusion. "Beware those that cannot see beyond their reach, let alone the horizon". LOL

Did you watch the Piece on Ben Livingston? They made massive rain storms in Vietnam causing fatalities and successfully inhibiting the movement of enemy military equipment and supplies and during the dry season during the war there, their mission was to do precisely that. If you understand weather at all in the tropics you will understand that is no easy task. If they could do that in the 1960's it would be also be naive in my opinion to assume that technology has not been advanced somewhat in half a century. There is not much of a progressive step between creating massive fatal rain storms in the dry season and creating tornadoes in tornado prone places... if you ask me. What qualification do you have that allows you to refute what Ben Livingston has told us in that presentation?

Ever heard of Ben Livingston? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vT8GGHWSmIY Alex has. I assume you have not, based on your previous reply so I guess Alex Jones is a bit more informed than you are on the subject. If you re pressed for time, scroll along to half way... Remember, Alex did not say this tornado was man made, he said if you saw aircraft around it during it's formation then it would likely be. The tin foil hat card is usually pulled out by those that freak out about something they do not wish to understand and are looking for others to assure them.

You are not being concise enough. Weather weapons do exist, do you acknowledge that? Particulars aside, firstly I have to establish whether or not you are willing to accept this first before working out whether debating it with you is worth while. You have already said that weather weapons do not exist and this demonstrates a naive standpoint.

Ha, as much as I do not understand much of what Alex Jones talks about, he is not a moron. Remember the rant he has on Piers Morgan a couple of months back.. Well Piers now agrees with Alex that the government is Tyrannical or very close to it. I bet you went with the flow there too when that was happening? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4T0fh00UVM The morons are those that wave the flag while personal liberties are removed at an alarming rate by the current administration and call it Patriotism, you decide whether or not you slip into that category. Do you trust what you are being told by the government and media?

Are you saying that weather weapons do not exist? There are several patents on different forms of these. They have also been banned by the Geneva convention for decades. What makes you say that technology that is decades old and on the record has not been advanced and being used in modern times. Are you aware of the patents on geo-engineering, that is already going on and is also very much on the record? Or do you just palm stuff off that you consider absurd conspiracy stuff without really researching it?

Pffffffffff. ROTFLMAO

The sheeple are too busy being all 'up in arms' about gun rights and gay rights to notice. This is not by accident. The 'corporate' media have blacked it out and hyped up other controversial issues as I stated above. This issue is ignored because even many of the most astute online 'government opposition' do not know about this, too much time looking up links on their favourite subjects. The only ones that were talking about it before it was passed are those 'crazy conspiracy theorists' that have no idea about anything...

? They fire anywhere below 750 feet do they not?

Then it is only a matter of time before a speed cypres fire occurs on landing...? Is there any point in having an AAD if the speeds reached during approach are on par with free fall...? I am an aircraft pilot so not up with the play here but this stuff is really interesting.

LOL, Some people will deny any old conspiracy theory even if they know themselves they are wrong. As long as the majority agree then they feel safe, is that correct? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yIOC1J44RYw

So you acknowledge that operation northwoods was a proposed false flag attack on the american people by the american government? And the only reason it did not go ahead is because president Kennedy refused shortly before his assassination? I guess it is hard not to acknowledge this when it is all completely on the record. I believe sandy hook may have been a false flag in order to confiscate weapons. I am not saying that was that, but that it maybe.

Tin foil hat? weak! I'm actually talking about conflicting reports from the same person. Namely Gene Rosen. In one report he had to come back from a walk, in another he was on the way to the diner, and yet another he just come downstairs after feeding his cat. In one report he said there were 3 girls and 3 boys and another he said 4 girls and 2 boys. He said he had an 8 year old grandson. On the record he has one 2 year old grandson. Same guy, same day, same clothes different reports. H e said he heard gun shots and thought it was a hunter. He lives next to the school, shots came from school, 100 shots from the direction of the school and thought it was a hunter. If that sounds reasonable to you then that is fair enough. He seems totally insincere to me, much like a bad actor. We're all entitled to our own opinions though, are we not? Saying I am a tin foil hatter because I have an opinion that differs from yours without substantiating the claim is nothing more than a personal attack. That is supposed to be against the forum rules.

There is much more to this thing than false reporting. There is contradicting witness reports (several from the same person) and contradicting information all over the show. The legislative reaction is very fishy.

Not really changing the subject. The whole thing is dodgy. If it turns out as a hoax then one must ask.... why. If it is not a hoax but the info on the situation we are told is false... then we also have to ask why. The knee jerk legislative reactions seem to be a dead giveaway. Many will say that criminals within government are not capable of committing murder to run an agenda. Those people usually are not aware of operations northwoods and the likes either. The Us government is already tyrannical...

How about looking at it from a different angle. Do you think abusing presidential powers by removing constitutional rights is tyranny? Do you support the ndaa and therefore detaining american citizens without trial or jury? Do you believe that the u.s. government has been completely lawful in their actions? What do you think the forefathers were thinking when they drafted second amendment?

Is it usual in this forum for the modertors to use personal attacks? Was that really called for? It seems like there is a real one sided attitude with the moderators up in here.

How far will we let these people go? How about them drone strikes? http://nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-newspaper-daily-english-online/islamabad/24-Jan-2013/stop-using-drones-on-our-people-president-tells-us How many people have the N koreans killed with military weapons? Children? and the USA? The real question should be, 'when will we learn to mind our own business'!