Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login

Details

Closed to new replies
November 26, 2012
Link

Statistics

Replies: 60

Is the weatherperson lying?

:iconcartoon-bomb:
cartoon-bomb Featured By Owner Nov 26, 2012

This set of documents from 1966 reveals a network of government agencies in perpetual and secret collaboration , working with the military to Geoengineer the climate. Created as an agenda of the elitist National Academy of Sciences – decades of an inter-agency culture of secrecy explains why the issue of covert aerosol Geoengineering is a taboo topic to be degraded to the status of “conspiracy theory” by every government agency in this web of complicit bureaucrats at every opportunity. This is why your local TV “meteorologist” will rarely make a helpful comment about an unusual sky filled with persistent jet trails.

[link]


Do meteorologists lie to us or are they just ill informed?

Being cute and super perky are the only qualifications you need to be a TV weatherperson -- Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs
Reply

You can no longer comment on this thread as it was closed due to no activity for a month.

Devious Comments

:iconyangosplat:
yangosplat Featured By Owner Dec 13, 2012  Hobbyist Photographer
VeteransToday.com is a extremsit anti-Zionist site. Of course everything on their website - especially about science - is and should be called into question.

Climate modification is not a secret military technology. It is absolutely public - there are probably tens if not hundreds of documentaries about the technology. The National Academy of Sciences is not "elitist" in any way. This is being treated like a conspiracy theory because that's exactly what it is.
Reply
:iconrizhnir:
Rizhnir Featured By Owner Nov 29, 2012
We should do to weatherpeople what Italy did to the scientist that "failed" to predict an earthquake -- chuck 'em in jail every time they get it wrong.

That'll learn 'em good.
Reply
:iconsherberttcat:
SherbertTCat Featured By Owner Nov 27, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Meteorologists make educated guesses based on the scientific data available to them.
An educated guess turning out wrong, isn't the same thing as a lie.
A lie is when you say something that you know isn't true.
Reply
:iconscottahemi:
ScottaHemi Featured By Owner Nov 27, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
even the most sophisticated super computers in existence can't properly predict the weather. for the weathermen and women on TV it's more of an educated guess. that's why they're always off.
Reply
:iconzcochrane:
ZCochrane Featured By Owner Nov 27, 2012  Student Photographer
Some weather people are lying. For example, they will never report a 50% chance of rain; they'll report either 40% or 60%, since nobody would believe exactly 50%. Likewise, in case of doubt, they'll rather predict rain over no rain, since people are happy if they expected rain and there is none, but they're upset if they expected no rain and it does start to rain. There is a great article by Nate Silver about this: [link]

However: All that geoengineering stuff, chemtrails and what not, that is just plain madness. These things do not exist in reality, only in conspiracy theories.
Reply
:icondivine--apathia:
divine--apathia Featured By Owner Nov 27, 2012  Hobbyist Photographer
Eh, All the storms this season has been predicted. :shrug:
Reply
:iconknightster:
Knightster Featured By Owner Nov 27, 2012
Forecast is essentially a flip of a coin. They don't lie. They don't know the weather to begin with.
Reply
:iconabcat:
AbCat Featured By Owner Nov 27, 2012   Writer
Don't worry. I can tell you with absolute authority that there will be hot hail where you are today.
Reply
:iconendeavor-to-freefall:
Depends where you're from, the US has terrible TV news but fairly good papers, the UK has terrible papers but the TV news is alright.
Reply
:iconkyteglory:
KyteGlory Featured By Owner Nov 27, 2012
Lolconspiracy theory.
Seriously, though, weatherpeople do lie. But it's not meteorologists lying. It's the weather reporters. They get fairly reliable reports from meteorologists, but if there's even a twenty percent chance of bad weather, that's the side they'll err to, because people are a lot less likely to be cross with them if they expected foul weather and got better than if they expected good weather and got worse.
Reply
:iconaazmatazz:
Aazmatazz Featured By Owner Nov 27, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Agreed.

I think the weather reporters hawk back to Michael Fish in 1987.
People were reporting high winds and a possible 'Mega Storm'
Michael Fish effectively told the nation 'Don't worry there is no storm coming'
The next day all hell had broken loose, roofs pulled from buildings, trees down, property damaged etc etc. The Weather people don't lie per se, I guess they just cover their own backs
Reply
:icontacosteev:
tacosteev Featured By Owner Nov 27, 2012  Hobbyist
Not me. I hate not doing something because the weather is supposed to be junk and it turned out nice.
Reply
:iconkyteglory:
KyteGlory Featured By Owner Nov 27, 2012
I hate that, too, but not as much as I hate being on a horse in the middle of nowhere and having a massive stormcload dropped on my unsuspecting head. It's annoying to stay home on a nice day, but it can potentially be miserable and dangerous to be out on a bad day.
Still, though, I'd much prefer if weather reporters stopped treating me like I'm too fucking stupid to comprehend variables, and reported the same weather probabilities they got from the meteorologists, so that I could decide for myself whether or not I should take my chances. A twenty percent chance of storms is virtually no danger to a parent taking their kids to the park but a very substantial danger to an outdoorsman venturing with unreliable transportation twenty miles away from shelter, so why would the weatherman give the same advice to both of them?
Reply
:icontacosteev:
tacosteev Featured By Owner Nov 29, 2012  Hobbyist
I agree there. Just tell it as it is when it comes to the weather. I'd rather know the chances of bad weather and decide for myself. It has gotten to the point of not trusting anything they say. Sometimes I went out when it was supposed to be bad, but turned out pretty nice and other times they were right on the money. Nothing like hiking in the rain and mud to feel alive :lol:
Reply
:iconnovuso:
Novuso Featured By Owner Nov 27, 2012
There is more than just faking global warming going on. There is a substantial amount of evidence that Hurricane Sandy was a geoengineered super storm. The documentation here is simply astounding though some will refuse to believe because they are in denial.

Long [link]
Short [link]
Documented: [link] [link]

To answer your question Yes they lie.
Reply
:icondoctorv23:
DoctorV23 Featured By Owner Nov 27, 2012
So why would we want to engineer a disaster like that - I don't see any motive?
Reply
:icondoctorv23:
DoctorV23 Featured By Owner Nov 27, 2012
That's a fascinating story, but I still don't get the connection with the storm. How would it affect a lawsuit one way or the other?
Reply
:iconnovuso:
Novuso Featured By Owner Nov 27, 2012
To understand this you have to know the whole story but I will try to explain in brief. The lawsuit goes back to 2008 with documentation of over a decade worth of theft and fraud. This case was being built up over a number of years since then and has been getting the run around in the legal system. The case was never supposed to get this far as the bankers have hired thousands of lawyers to fight it and keep it tied up forever. But the thing is those lawyers had no defense to offer because the Bankers are actually guilty of this theft and everyone knows it. The lawyers on both sides know this, the court system knows this, the government regulators know this, Wall Street itself knows this.

Too big to fail in 2008 has now become "Too Big to Jail" in 2012. They have been playing this game but the jig is up now. The lawsuit is going forward and has been assigned a Federal judge to give the final ruling (Case No. 12-cv-04269-JBW-RML). On Oct 25th 2012 Spire Law group made available the entire affidavit as well as official press release which was first picked up by CNBC and other financial news organizations.

This led the Bankers to Panic and the initiating of Operation Mindfuck. [link]

CNBC executive Kevin Krim's two children were found murdered, viciously stabbed to death, supposedly, by the Krim family's 50-year old nanny Yoselyn Ortega. She was also found with what is being reported as "self-inflicted" stab wounds. She slit her own throat right after she stabbed the Krim children. This was covered extensively in the mainstream news but just like the weatherman these news reporters told a lie to the American people.

All of this is real. This was an obvious cartel hit and they didn't cover their tracks too well.

Because there's this: Three hours before these murders were officially reported, there were NYPD reports of a HOSTAGE SITUATION at the Krim's address involving at least three adults and two children.

NYCityAlerts @NYCityAlerts
Manhattan: *Hostage* 57 West 75 St Barricaded perp stabbed holding hostage 3 adults 2 kids, ESU enroute Level 1 mobilization called.NY03
2:42 PM - 25 Oct 12 ·

NYCityAlerts @NYCityAlerts
Manhattan: *Multiple Stabbing* 57 West 75 St. NYPD advising perp stabbed 4 victims then stabbed himself, EMS requested on a rush. NY03
2:50 PM - 25 Oct 12 ·

NYCityAlerts @NYCityAlerts
Manhattan: *Multiple Stabbing* 57 West 75 St & Central Park West. EMS o/s advising 2 pediatrics in traumatic arrest. NY03
2:55 PM - 25 Oct 12 ·

Just like the lawsuit itself everyone knows what happened here including the NYPD, the NYC government, FBI, and the courts. The killing of these children was a message to these entities: 'Do NOT screw with the Banks. We own you, we own everything, we own the system, we are the system, nobody touches the banks, Comply or Die.'

The Hurricane was the second part of the message to intimidate the entire system. (See the links in the previous post proving the hurricane was an unnatural frankenstorm a term dubbed by the media referencing the mad scientist Frankenstein + storm) They did it and those who scientifically understand geoengineering meteorology know they did it. But again the same message. 'We are god, nobody touches the banks.'

However, this is a lot like the scene from the Wizard of OZ when OZ says 'I am the all powerful OZ, pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.' Now the question remains are we the people going to believe them being mere sheep intimidated by parlor tricks or do we pull back the curtain and find out how deep this rabbit hole really goes. I say pull the curtain and let the Jubilee begin.
Reply
:iconsahidenethare:
SahidenEthare Featured By Owner Nov 26, 2012   Writer
It was degraded to a conspiracy theory because the results showed it hasn't yielded the expected results while the conspiracy theory claims it did. The research has been deemed a failure as it turned out to be costing more to modify the weather than it did to raise disaster emergency funds.
Let's also not forget conspiracy theorists tend to have the entirely wrong idea about weather modification research. There's no weather control device. This deals with using reactive agents in an attempt to quell hurricanes before they reached land, to create more rain to stimulate hydro power and improve farming. China still has a small program on weather modifications like that running, even though there's no scientific basis to believe it helps any.

Rather than take some website's word for it, how about reading the article in question?
[link]

This gives us gems like:
Over the past twenty years experiments have been
conducted on weather modification, particularly on the
effects of seedinq- clouds with such materials as
silver iodide crystals. The results are limited.


Yes, the article in question sounds hopeful for positive results after that, but let's not forget it's a document from 1966.

In 2003, we get the following:

[link]

There is little to no research associated with any of these operational programs.



So yeah, conspiracy theory it is. Meteorologists don't lie to us, and are in fact better informed than you seem to be.
Reply
:iconcartoon-bomb:
cartoon-bomb Featured By Owner Nov 29, 2012
um no ...

first, you don't discuss evidence, just old studies. what was considered to be limited potential in 60s is reality now.

Here is an example of people complaining about the effects of geoengineering who don't resort to using labels like "conspiracy theory" and instead discuss facts:

[link]

2 phenomome are discussed, cloud seeding, and chemtrails.

it is not a conpiracy theory to claim that the government is lying about weather modification.

yes china has a weather modification program, as does thailand. that doesn't mean the west isn't secretly using its own system.

best explanation for chemtrails is geoengineering:


This massive research study is entitled: Policy Implications of Greenhouse Warming: Mitigation, Adaptation, and the Science Base - Panel on Policy Implications of Greenhouse Warming, sponsored by the National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The results were presented in 1992 and published in book form in 2000 by the National Academy Press. This 994 page study is the textbook on greenhouse gasses, global warming, policy decisions and mitigation's (corrective measures). Included within is the hard science many chemtrails researchers have been searching for: the scientists, agencies, institutions and corporations involved, cost factors, chemical formula, mathematical modeling, delivery methods, policies, recruiting of foreign governments, acquisition of materials, and the manufacturing of aerosol compounds, ect.

Chemtrails are just one of the 'mitigations' proposed to Geoengineering our planet.


In Policy Implications of Greenhouse Warming: Mitigation, Adaptation, and the Science Bases conclusion, the N.A.S. found that the most effective global warming mitigation turned out to be the spraying of reflective aerosol compounds into the atmosphere utilizing commercial, military and private aircraft. This preferred mitigation method is designed to create a global atmospheric shield which would increase the planet's albedo (reflectivity) using aerosol compounds of aluminum and barium oxides, and to introduce ozone generating chemicals into the atmosphere.


[link]

it might also relate to shielding electronics from EM pulse

[link]

whatever the reason, meteorologists should be talking about why the sky is criss crossed with chemtrails. yes they are lying by omission. climate change modelers should publish their models for open examination. if they are not modeling this aluminium in the atmosphere their models are faulty and they are being dishonest.
Reply
:iconsahidenethare:
SahidenEthare Featured By Owner Nov 30, 2012   Writer
first, you don't discuss evidence, just old studies.

Those old studies is all your OP links to. Hence, they are relevant.

what was considered to be limited potential in 60s is reality now.

It is not, see the recent studies I linked. There is nothing real about it.

Here is an example of people complaining about the effects of geoengineering who don't resort to using labels like "conspiracy theory" and instead discuss facts:

And you could also find people complaining about the exploits of the lizard pope. That does not count as evidence to anything but their imagination.

it is not a conpiracy theory to claim that the government is lying about weather modification.

Yes, it is actually, because that's not true.

yes china has a weather modification program, as does thailand. that doesn't mean the west isn't secretly using its own system.

The west isn't even keeping it secret. Read the article I linked. It talks about the program the USA has running, and how there's no scientific basis for it.

best explanation for chemtrails is geoengineering:

No, it isn't. Chemtrails is the mindspawn of some people who don't know the first thing about science. The best explanation for them is: [link]

Because you see, there are no scientists working on chemtrails, there is no research.
[link]
Read the sources. Seriously, there's no scientific basis that chemtrails would even be possible, or have any effect at all if it were.

whatever the reason, meteorologists should be talking about why the sky is criss crossed with chemtrails.

They don't because they don't have any evidence this is the case.

if they are not modeling this aluminium in the atmosphere their models are faulty and they are being dishonest.

They don't need to cater to your delusions.
Here's an idea: If it's not in their reports, they simply haven't found any evidence of it.

If you're going to argue this, do it seriously. Don't link me some third-rate fiction that has to pass as a "legitimate study" yet fails to uphold even the basic structure of a research paper and isn't peer reviewed.
These links may fool someone who doesn't know the first thing about science, but you can't fool someone versed in science with them.
Reply
:iconcartoon-bomb:
cartoon-bomb Featured By Owner Nov 30, 2012
you say seeding for reduction of global warming is not possible. why is there a patent for it?

[link]

Here's an idea: If it's not in their reports, they chose to leave it out.

""legitimate study" yet fails to uphold even the basic structure of a research paper and isn't peer reviewed."

i've seen creationists use comments like this to dis darwin. sorry, if you can't actually talk about the evidence, you aint "versed in science".
Reply
:iconsahidenethare:
SahidenEthare Featured By Owner Nov 30, 2012   Writer
you say seeding for reduction of global warming is not possible. why is there a patent for it?

Stop spreading misinformation and read the report. Of course a patent would be created back in the 90's when there still was some support for this research. This is called pre-emptive patenting, and it doesn't mean the invention actually exists.

If you wanted to be honest, why didn't you just link the patent in question? It's at: [link]

Wow, what a secret we have there.


A primer on patenting: A lot of patents are created pre-emptively to curb competition. See: [link]
In other words: the existence of a patent means nothing. Especially since we already know research has been done on this subject, and no results were produced.
The existence of the patent is thus a foregone conclusion.

Here's an idea: If it's not in their reports, they chose to leave it out.
Pure speculation. Where's your evidence for this? Why would scientists around the globe leave it out when practically anyone can replicate the data? Better yet, why haven't you collected any data yourself?
It seems you're not very eager to prove yourself at all.

i've seen creationists use comments like this to dis darwin

And if you were a scientist, you'd know that Darwin's theory doesn't uphold the basic requirements, and hasn't been used in over a century. Science moved on from Darwinism a long time ago.

sorry, if you can't actually talk about the evidence, you aint "versed in science".

What evidence? You've produced nothing but conjecture based on nothing but your own prejudice.
The moment you show me evidence, I'll talk about evidence. But if you keep referring to things like patents, I'd have to say you're just grasping for straws.
Reply
:iconcartoon-bomb:
cartoon-bomb Featured By Owner Nov 30, 2012
interesting about darwin, he came up with a theory about facial expressions, science later "moved on" and then 150+ years later these psychologists actually did some field work and found he was spot on.

evidence trumps citations. citations, peer review, these are things people who are on the wrong side of the evidence hide behind.

the lab tests show that aluminium levels are off the charts ([link])

interestingly Monsanto develops Aluminum Resistant biotech seeds

([link])

"Especially since we already know research has been done on this subject, and no results were produced."

hi the report you cited had a follow up report by 'weather modification association' which mentioned "possible negative bias" of your report and claimed they lacked experitise.

www.weathermodification.org/images/FinalReport.pdf

from AMS policy staetment:

One tool available for mitigating some of these weather impacts is planned weather modification through cloud seeding. In its most common form, specially formulated aerosols or very cold materials are dispersed in targeted locations within clouds to achieve precipitation enhancement, hail damage mitigation, fog clearing, and other intentional effects. Cloud seeding techniques have been developed over nearly 70 years through experimentation and trials.

If there's no results (there are, see the follow up report), why does AMS mention it as part of their policy?

You claim I personally need to prove weather modification is being undertaken. Are you being ridiculous???

In the case of radiation from fukushima, lay people with geiger counters can collect data. In the case of weather modification it is not feasible for lay people to collect data other than contaminated water samples. For example, if I wanted to test if there is aluminium in the atmosphere I would need to collect data on variation in spectroscopy at a large number of points ... wait for it ... decades in the past.

All your comments basically rest on your own supposed knowledge of science ... you display none ... you are trying to argue based on 'ethos' not 'logos' ... start looking at the evidence please.
Reply
:iconsahidenethare:
SahidenEthare Featured By Owner Nov 30, 2012   Writer
There is no point in arguing with a deactivated account. :shrug:
Reply
:iconpsyopjunkie:
psyopjunkie Featured By Owner Dec 9, 2012
[link]

^ that picture summarises how much i just won this scientific debate.
Reply
(2 Replies)
:iconpsyopjunkie:
psyopjunkie Featured By Owner Dec 9, 2012
hi this is my alt account.

here is a scientific smackdown for you.

1. theory by NAVY showing how harp works

2. satellite images showing geometric patterns conform to this prediction

3. geometric patterns could not be produced naturally

4. a number of patents

[link]

QED I win.
Reply
(1 Reply)
:iconnovuso:
Novuso Featured By Owner Nov 30, 2012
In addition to controlling the weather chemtrails are also part of slow kill population reduction program. CO2 is a harmless gas that comes out when we breathe. The chemtrails on the other hand are poisons that include heavy metals and even radioactive barium. Very bad and evil things these are.
Reply
:iconabstract-mindser:
Abstract-Mindser Featured By Owner Nov 26, 2012
It honestly depends on whose weather we're talking.
Reply
:iconmaddmatt:
maddmatt Featured By Owner Nov 26, 2012
My local weather is pretty informative and usually reliable.
Reply
Add a Comment: