HAARP Engineering 'FRANKENSTORM' Hurricane Sandy - CAUGHT on SATELLITE and RADAR!!!
- Thread starter PoopyTeaBags
- Start date
Well first of all I don't post based on what people think is helpful or not. I post what I feel based on the post I'm responding to or the topic at hand. If someone else doesn't find it helpful or even if they do, that means nothing to me. I probably didn't make it to be helpful to everyone reading. Since you place so much stock in such things though, I can tell you I picked up several positive reputation points for my comments.
As for your evaluation of me, well that's your opinion and like me and everyone else, you're entitled to your opinion. I can play that game too though and my opinion is that if you feel you can judge someone you've never met or talked to after only reading one page of posts then you're a snieveling, shallow, idiot. You're only contribution here is to attack other people's opinions on what's being discussed rather then introducing anything of substance towards the topic. Also if you've only read one page you have no basis for the opinion that I've called everyone I've disagreed with a "tinfoil hat nutjob conspiracy theorist". For the record I've never called anyone a tinfoil hat nutjob conspiracy theorist. Clearly though you are one of those morons that glance at something and think they know all there is to know.
Clearly since you haven't a clue let me fill you in on what's going on, assuming your brain hasn't overheated yet and prevents you from reading this far. This thread is about someone's claim that Super Storm Sandy was engineered by HAARP and proof of that is caught on radar. Numbnuts in the tinfoil panties over here is trying to turn it into a discussion about Agenda 21. Agenda 21 has absolutely nothing, zip, zilch, nada to do with Super Storm Sandy. I haven't shot down his point about Agenda 21 and I even let him try to run with it a bit before I started pointing out he's actually hijacking a thread and should start his own thread. All I've really done with regards to Agenda 21 is to post a brief general description of what it is in contrast to his very slanted view of what it is. So that people could have a choice of what to believe since few people have even heard of Agenda 21. That and I pointed out a video he posted conveniently cuts off right at the point where it sounds like his remarkable claim about Bill Gates is supported rather then post the whole video and allow people to draw their own conclusion. All of which you might know if you actually read the one page you claim to have read.
Like him you seem to be someone not interested in actual debate but rather you seem to want to force your views down peoples throats by attacking people who differ from you views rather then supply an objective evidence to support them. I've made no claims to Agenda 21 or Bill Gates desire for the rest of the population, so I have no need to support anything. Also it's perfectly reasonable for me to insist on objective evidence rather then one sided subjective bullshit.
Now fuck off and go back to wishing for planets where you can segregate people into groups that you see fit to seperate them into.
hempkat, you're either with them or us.
Maybe you can offer me proof that it WASN'T used as a weapon.
I know. Let's just take things at face value and believe our government. Everything is what it seems and every secret is known. No secrets are actively kept, you know, like a "notch" in the activity log on the computer of a pilot that wasn't present, wasn't there, but now there is documentation he was. AKA cover=up.
LOL The government is a super-powerful liar. Look at how "above" top secret is structured. It breaks down so that not much info can be used, but collectively, someone looking down at all of it and knowing it's true use in context is just amazing. Compartmentalized intelligence.
It's not that they don't let everyone know some secrets, it's that someone knows a bunch of them.
Say you have a plan for a bomb. Say another person knows how to manipulate people.
Create said small campaign in town. Distribute flyers with misinformation about Iran doing it.
Incite hate, create a war.
9.11 that's it.
Maybe you can offer me proof that it WASN'T used as a weapon.
I know. Let's just take things at face value and believe our government. Everything is what it seems and every secret is known. No secrets are actively kept, you know, like a "notch" in the activity log on the computer of a pilot that wasn't present, wasn't there, but now there is documentation he was. AKA cover=up.
LOL The government is a super-powerful liar. Look at how "above" top secret is structured. It breaks down so that not much info can be used, but collectively, someone looking down at all of it and knowing it's true use in context is just amazing. Compartmentalized intelligence.
It's not that they don't let everyone know some secrets, it's that someone knows a bunch of them.
Say you have a plan for a bomb. Say another person knows how to manipulate people.
Create said small campaign in town. Distribute flyers with misinformation about Iran doing it.
Incite hate, create a war.
9.11 that's it.
Sorry dude but there's more options then the two offered by your black and white world. Such as I'm my own person and as such am entitled to my own beliefs without having alliegence to anyone else on the topic.
As for proof, I didn't make the claim to have proof that HAARP didn't create Super Storm Sandy therefore the onus is not on me to prove that it didn't. A claim was made however that there is proof caught on radar that HAARP did create Super Storm Sandy and therefore the onus is on anyone making such a claim to provide said proof.
I could totally make up some outrageous claim and then demand anyone who challenges said made up claim to disprove it and they wouldn't be able to because it's totally made up and so no proof exists one way or another. I could also do like you're trying to do and point to the fact that secrets have been kept by our government in the past about questionable activities. Which is true, secrets have been kept, but it still doesn't make my made up story any more real.
FDA's Mission Statement The FDA is responsible for protecting the public health by assuring the safety, efficacy, and security of human and veterinary drugs, biological products, medical devices, our nation��s food supply, cosmetics, and products that emit radiation. The FDA is also responsible for advancing the public health by helping to speed innovations that make medicines and foods more effective, safer, and more affordable; and helping the public get the accurate, science-based information they need to use medicines and foods to improve their health.
Is this what you think the FDA actually does?
Why don't you trust the EPA, DEA, ATF, IRS, DHS, TSA, FEMA, if you don't trust them? If you trust them then you should go visit a FEMA Camp as soon as the next big catastrophe starts. They have MRE's and crayons for your kids too.
Is this what you think the FDA actually does?
Why don't you trust the EPA, DEA, ATF, IRS, DHS, TSA, FEMA, if you don't trust them? If you trust them then you should go visit a FEMA Camp as soon as the next big catastrophe starts. They have MRE's and crayons for your kids too.
My world isn't black and white, it's not as polarised as you think.
You only posit that it's one-sided. The question is, did I say it has to be this or that? Or did I give you an opposite and leave you to answer it?
I gave you an opposite, to make it clear that if there were ever a device to control the weather, it wouldn't be advertised as such.
I do respect that you read what I posted, and responded as I would.
There just isn't any proof.
But why would scientists and all their research, let anything be "proof." LOL MUST THERE BE PROOF?
Give me proof that I am a human. You can't conclusively.
In the same way we all know I am human, we know this device wasn't built for fun.
I guess I really don't believe that it caused a whole storm. Maybe it's computers predicted really far and it only needed to change one thing to cascade it all down?
I really believe that human tendency is to control and not let things be known. I also believe if you never get caught breaking the law, you've never broken it. I believe this is how the government works.
Hempkat, look up why "black" is in black ops and you'll see congress and them have a thing where their operations are so "black" that it's really convenient that no evidence at all is left behind to even prosecute. That's what is so special, you don't break the law or get convicted if you are SO good you leave no evidence. They call it something. Like "beyond a reasonable doubt" but it's "lack of plausability."
what is weird is, I don't believe this is paranoid at all.
You only posit that it's one-sided. The question is, did I say it has to be this or that? Or did I give you an opposite and leave you to answer it?
I gave you an opposite, to make it clear that if there were ever a device to control the weather, it wouldn't be advertised as such.
I do respect that you read what I posted, and responded as I would.
There just isn't any proof.
But why would scientists and all their research, let anything be "proof." LOL MUST THERE BE PROOF?
Give me proof that I am a human. You can't conclusively.
In the same way we all know I am human, we know this device wasn't built for fun.
I guess I really don't believe that it caused a whole storm. Maybe it's computers predicted really far and it only needed to change one thing to cascade it all down?
I really believe that human tendency is to control and not let things be known. I also believe if you never get caught breaking the law, you've never broken it. I believe this is how the government works.
Hempkat, look up why "black" is in black ops and you'll see congress and them have a thing where their operations are so "black" that it's really convenient that no evidence at all is left behind to even prosecute. That's what is so special, you don't break the law or get convicted if you are SO good you leave no evidence. They call it something. Like "beyond a reasonable doubt" but it's "lack of plausability."
what is weird is, I don't believe this is paranoid at all.
I see you still don't have any valid points or issues to discuss and talk about either and so instead you just throw out snide argumentative remarks. Weren't you the one judging people for not engaging in what you felt was serious debate?
Wrong I responded to your remark of
Sounds pretty polarized to me.
No you said I'm either with them or us. No positing involved. I then went on to point out I'm niether with or against them or us I am with me.
No actually you went on to suggest that because the government does keep secrets and they've been caught in some serious lies before then that pretty much proves anything you can imagine. What I find remarkable about people like you though is that with one hand you paint the government as being this really devious entity up to no good that's very good at doing all sorts of things using very sophisticated means and then on the other hand you paint them as being foolish and careless morons that leak out all these deep dark secrets all the time for you and people like you to go tell around the internet.
Oh so now you do want to talk about HAARP and Super Storm Sandy? Okay well good, you do know though it wasn't you that made the original claim right? That as such it's not your responsibility to prove it. Nor should you try since you start off by guessing that you don't really believe it caused a whole storm. Okay now that we got that out of the way, you do understand that I'm asking for proof not because I believe there is any but because the thread title suggests there is and that it's on radar and satallite. Unfortunately all that was on radar and satallite was the storm itself because there never was proof HAARP had anything at all to do with Super Storm Sandy. Which I knew because it's never been proven that HAARP is capable of engineering hurricanes it's only ever been theorized that it might be able to which the government has steadily claimed that it can not. Of course that's what they would say right? I mean they're the government, they lie about everything.
Well that's your opinion, I'm sure you look at it that way. I wonder how many laws you've not broken because you haven't been caught? I'm guessing with such a cynical attitude it goes far beyond growing and using weed. I often find it amazing that for as much as some people judge and condemn the government they are hardly paragons of virtue from which they might have the right to make such judgements. Mostly they're end up being like the guy who hounds his girl with suspicions of her cheating on him because he cheats on her. I'll tell you what though, if the government is actually using HAARP to make hurricanes and are trying not to let it be known they are doing a pretty poor job, so many people ask them if HAARP is capable of affecting the weather that they have their answer in the FAQ on the HAARP website. Usually when one is trying to not be known they don't have a web site or FAQ's. I'm pretty sure for example that the Fast and Furious program didn't have a web site or an FAQ to answer the question "Do the guns that end up in the hands of Mexican Cartels thru the Fast and Furious program ever get used on American citizen?"
Well I did look up black ops. Mostly what I got was links to call of duty Black ops, you know, the game. There was one link that gave an explaination that roughly matches yours but it was just an individual giving his opinion. Oddly enough the person asking the question was asking in terms of the game though. The thing I'm wondering though is if these black ops are done so well they leave no evidence then how is it that it ever gets out? Is one of them Black Ops guys snitching on the rest? Or is it just because someone imagines something that sounds about right?
I don't know, maybe it's just me but when someone goes around saying he knows all about the government's evil plans even though they leave zero evidence, that sounds pretty paranoid to me.
Too funny, you automatically assume I don't research this stuff simply because I don't agree with you. As if one having done the research would only ever draw your same conclusions. I have done the research, the thing is I don't just stop with the things that support what I want to believe. Unfortunately for you guys is there are far more sources discrediting or debunking your theories then there are sources supporting it and the few that do so, do it solely based on conjecture.
Here's something for you all to ponder, you all are pretty much in agreement that ultimately the ones behind all this are the wealthy elite right? The top 1% or so? Well if they are and they manage to kill off or enslave the rest of us as that seems to be what you think thier goal is, then how are they suppose to stay rich and keep getting richer?
By all means though I too hope everyone that reads this thread does their own research rather then just accepting what's posted here. Anyone who would just accept something simply because someone else says so would most certainly deserve being thought of as sheeple.
If you need to have that explained to you then I doubt you have the cognitive ability to grasp the explaination.
ill do so pictorially
this is a slave
this is a douche who says we are slaves
this is a family of slaves
this is a family of douches who say we are all slaves
any questions?
Thanks for putting words in my mouth and making up ideas for me man, maybe I can just judge you as thinking you're better than everyone
You think you're above people who say the government is really secretive and smart, but are really dumb for letting out secrets. Too bad I am not one of them that thinks this and you've somehow just grouped me in with them and shit on me.
Really, go back and try to examine anything I said, that the government is stupid and let's it's secrets out, but really smart and playing us also.
Try to find it anywhere.
Then you talk about how I am black-and-white. Good for you. You've used everything in the book except using real arguments.
I think a light is on or off, don't you?
I also think it's apparent if snow is on the ground or not.
See, those are events/happenings in which two outcomes happen. It has NOTHING to do with the people speculating it. It doesn't mean a person is black or white.
What the hell dude? I know people like to make fun of Call of Duty because they think they know things about guns/ war, but REALLY I am not talking about the game.
Nor did I learn about this from a game. The term "black ops" was used before a game, so why don't you stop implying that I am talking about the game....when clearly YOU ARE.
Then you talk about "laws you don't get caught for, you don't break"
Let me be clear, this isn't MY finding. It is not MY BELIEF. People with that belief are psychopaths/sociopaths. I was just saying that's how the law is, not what I think it is. Again, let me re-iterate NOT MY BELIEF. It is my belief that THIS IS HOW THEY TREAT LAW.
Originally Posted by devilgoob View Post
My world isn't black and white, it's not as polarised as you think.
Hempkat:Wrong I responded to your remark of
hempkat, you're either with them or us.
Sounds pretty polarized to me.
Yea, you must be dumb. The question is polarized, but you're talking about me.
Oh, ok, so my "world" is black and white?
You take a single question, designed to only have two options and then call me "black and white"
So get it straight, my question was black and white, not my world.
