U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 08-25-2012, 01:47 PM
 
Location: Victoria, BC.
30,884 posts, read 31,769,092 times
Reputation: 12628

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don9 View Post
Here is the USAF research paper (PDF) from 1996. This is the research government document that is mentioned in the documentary. It's a very interesting document and covers the military applications with controlling the weather.

This link (PDF file) is to a government server.

Weather as a Force Multiplier:
Owning the Weather in 2025
Read the disclaimer..."This report contains fictional representations of future situations/scenarios"

 
Old 08-25-2012, 02:17 PM
 
15,924 posts, read 17,420,666 times
Reputation: 7641
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don9 View Post
Here is the USAF research paper (PDF) from 1996. This is the research government document that is mentioned in the documentary. It's a very interesting document and covers the military applications with controlling the weather.

This link (PDF file) is to a government server.

Weather as a Force Multiplier:
Owning the Weather in 2025
The military looks at all options when it comes to weapons, more grasping at straws by the loony chemtrail conspiracy folks

So when are you going to launch into your other wild fantasies? HAARP? Area 51? the Master Computer controlling chemplanes? We need more laughs...

Quote:
In war, innovation can mean the difference between a glorious victory and a world shattering defeat. When research and development departments have the funding of a desperate nation behind them, and are faced with a long and brutal campaign, the ideas that are spawned can turn the tide of battle. It’s inevitable that some of the wilder ideas would later seem ridiculous.
http://weburbanist.com/2010/01/12/we...y-innovations/

http://www.toptenz.net/top-10-weirdest-weapons.php

http://www.oddee.com/item_91684.aspx
 
Old 08-25-2012, 02:26 PM
 
15,924 posts, read 17,420,666 times
Reputation: 7641
https://www.facebook.com/ChemtrailsAreNotRealIdiotsAre
 
Old 08-25-2012, 02:29 PM
 
15,924 posts, read 17,420,666 times
Reputation: 7641

Contrails! - YouTube
 
Old 08-25-2012, 02:30 PM
 
5,113 posts, read 4,955,184 times
Reputation: 1732
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur View Post
Read the disclaimer..."This report contains fictional representations of future situations/scenarios"
So what's your point? This was a research paper from 16 years ago and as it stated that some of the proposed capability is based on existing technology (in 1996) and even refers to HAARP.
 
Old 08-25-2012, 02:32 PM
 
15,924 posts, read 17,420,666 times
Reputation: 7641
Contrail Grids are not Chemtrail Grids - Contrail Science » Contrail Science



BTW all, go back and look at post #63, don describes the above picture thus:

Quote:
In this Satalite image you can see all the aerosol spray trails (AKA Chemtrails) on the edge of the storm front.

Last edited by plwhit; 08-25-2012 at 02:43 PM..
 
Old 08-25-2012, 02:38 PM
 
15,924 posts, read 17,420,666 times
Reputation: 7641
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don9 View Post
So what's your point? This was a research paper from 16 years ago and as it stated that some of the proposed capability is based on existing technology (in 1996) and even refers to HAARP.
What point are you trying to make? That people can write research papers about making anything into a weapon?

Have to congratulate you, you stretch the limits of credulity to a new level....

Why do we need chemplanes when this was researched back in the early 1900's????

The Whirlwind Weapon...



I'll betcha there are thousands of them located strategically around the world and sitting around the base of the weapons are drums filled with chemicals that make people dumber and more gullible as the years go by....

Last edited by plwhit; 08-25-2012 at 03:01 PM..
 
Old 08-25-2012, 03:03 PM
 
5,113 posts, read 4,955,184 times
Reputation: 1732
Within a few months after Obama took office his administration was preparing for geoengineering.


Obama climate adviser open to geo-engineering to tackle global warming

The global warming situation has become so dire that Barack Obama's chief scientific adviser has raised with the president the possibility of massive-scale technological fixes to alter the climate known as 'geo-engineering'.

John Holdren, who is a member of the president's cabinet, said today the drastic measures should not be "off the table" in discussions on how best to tackle climate change. While his office insisted that he was not proposing a dramatic switch in policy, Holdren said geo-engineering could not be ruled out.

"It's got to be looked at. We don't have the luxury of taking any approach off the table," Holdren said in an interview with Associated Press. He made clear these were his personal views.

The suite of mega-technological fixes includes everything from placing mirrors in space that reflect sunlight from the Earth, to fertilising the oceans with iron to encourage the growth of algae that can soak up atmospheric carbon dioxide. Another option is to seed clouds which bounce the sun's rays back into space so they do not warm the Earth's surface.

Such global-scale technological solutions to climate change may seem fantastical, but increasing numbers of scientists argue that the technologies should at least be investigated.

Holdren's comments do not mean that the US government is raising the priority of geo-engineering. A spokesman for the US Government's Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) - which Holdren directs - said "the administration's primary focus is still to seek comprehensive energy legislation that can get us closer to a clean energy economy, and can create green jobs while reducing dependence on foreign oil."

Advocates of the technology have welcomed the comments. Stephen Salter, an engineer at Edinburgh University and a pioneer of techniques to seed clouds so that they reflect the Sun's rays back into space, said: "Everyone working in geo-engineering works with some reluctance: we hope it'll never be needed, but we fear it might be needed very very urgently. Holden is echoing that exactly. It's very encouraging – we've had extremely negative reactions from the UK governments."

Salter said that geo-engineering techniques were the only methods that would lower world temperatures quickly enough. Even if the world stopped emitting CO2 tomorrow, he said, the world would continue to get hotter for several decades. "Opponents say it would take the pressure off getting the renewables developed. I've been working on renewables since 1973 and stopped because we're too late, we wasted too much time. We may have a panic very soon because of the way the Arctic ice is going."

Greenpeace chief scientist Doug Parr, however, has said: "The wider point is not the pros and cons of particular technologies, but that the scientific community is becoming so scared of our collective inability to tackle climate emissions that such outlandish schemes are being considered for serious study. We already have the technology and know-how to make dramatic cuts in global emissions -but it's not happening, and those closest to the climate science are coming near to pressing the panic button."

Holdren acknowledged that some of the potential geo-engineering solutions could have side effects, and that such actions should not be taken lightly.

Though cloud-seeding, for example, would cool the earth, it would also lead to more acidic oceans, since the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere - and therefore the CO2 absorbed into the seas - would keep increasing. But Holdren added: "We might get desperate enough to want to use it."

His comments seemed to go against those he made in a speech to the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in 2007. There, he highlighted geo-engineering's potential to help cool the atmosphere or to remove greenhouse gases, but acknowledged the methods would likely require significant investment, and also warned against expecting a single technological solution to solve energy and climate problems. "Belief in technological miracles is generally a mistake," he said.

Writing last year in a special edition of the Royal Society journal Philosophical Transactions that was dedicated to geo-engineering, Brian Launder of the University of Manchester and Michael Thompson of the University of Cambridge said: "While such geo-scale interventions may be risky, the time may well come when they are accepted as less risky than doing nothing. There is increasingly the sense that governments are failing to come to grips with the urgency of setting in place measures that will assuredly lead to our planet reaching a safe equilibrium."

In a series of papers, experts said that a reluctance "at virtually all levels" to address rising greenhouse gas emissions meant carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere were on track to pass 650 parts per million, which could bring an average global temperature rise of 4C. They called for more research on geo-engineering options to cool the earth.
 
Old 08-25-2012, 03:12 PM
 
Location: Northern CA
12,770 posts, read 9,842,707 times
Reputation: 4243
and this

In a surprising turnaround, the amount of carbon dioxide being released into the atmosphere in the U.S. has fallen dramatically to its lowest level in 20 years, and government officials say the biggest reason is that cheap and plentiful natural gas has led many power plant operators to switch from dirtier-burning coal.

Many of the world’s leading climate scientists didn’t see the drop coming, in large part because it happened as a result of market forces rather than direct government action against carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas that traps heat in the atmosphere.


Read more: CO2 Emissions in US Drop to 20-Year Low | Science and Space | TIME.com

So now Obama turns to crushing the natural gas industry.
 
Old 08-25-2012, 03:36 PM
 
15,924 posts, read 17,420,666 times
Reputation: 7641
I see we are now off into FantasyLand:

Quote:
The global warming situation has become so dire that Barack Obama's chief scientific adviser has raised with the president the possibility of massive-scale technological fixes to alter the climate known as 'geo-engineering'.
Over the last few years it has become laughable just how wrong obama's advisers have been (and how many have been fired for their ludicrous attitudes)....

Models, Not Climate, Are Hypersensitive to Carbon Dioxide

According to the most recent IPCC Assessment Report 4 (p103, AR4 WG1 FAQs) we’ve only seen 0.7oC from enhanced greenhouse — and land use change, black and brown carbon (soot and smoke) and everything else of which humanity stands accused. While it’s a long list, there has been little global temperature effect.


This means the marvelous magical multipliers used in the models should actually be divisors. And there are good logical reasons this should be so. While climate models always treat clouds as warming influences, anyone trying to catch some rays and interrupted by intervening cumulonimbi would beg to differ.


Some will claim this is because warming takes a long time to equilibrate and that most of the warming is “in the pipeline.” That’s outright nonsense.
As the National Climatic Data Center points out, Earth reacts rapidly to the extra absorption of incoming solar radiation by northern hemisphere land masses, increasing the planet’s mean temperature by almost 4oC from January to July and cooling back to January again. The mean land surface temperature changes more than 11oC over the same period. In our new analysis, we provide a multi-source time series of Earth’s warming and subsequent cooling with the 1997-1998 “super El Nińo” event — it was done and dusted in under 30 months.


Steve Milloy: Models, Not Climate, Are Hypersensitive to Carbon Dioxide | JunkScience.com
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top