eersandbeers wrote: Do you only believe something if the government tells you it is true? I think we've discussed that before in these conspiracy threads and that is the only way you will believe something.

Here is the plan developed by the Air Force to own the weather as a weapon by 2025.

http://csat.au.af.mil/2025/volume3/vol3ch15.pdf

doesnt have to be the government, can be any person who has facts, not just theories. like i said earlier, people have been wanting to control the weather since man first walked the earth, the concept is nothing new. show me facts that its happening and i will believe you.

From the disclaimer of that report:

2025 is a study designed to comply with a directive from the chief of staff of the Air Force to examine the
concepts, capabilities, and technologies the United States will require to remain the dominant air and space
force in the future.

From page 31 of that report:

In contrast, artificial weather technologies do not currently exist.

Just started watching the second one. first of all, what does it take to be one of Ventura's "elite investigators"? whats funny is that one of his investigators actually said, what if the reason that guy wasnt invited to the 9/11 hearings was because his story wasnt even true. of course Ventura didnt even consider that even though its already been proven that people have lied about being at the world trade center.

haha i like that guy alex. and did ventura just said "painters can be painting it on and not even know it" then said "it could be anywhere...." wow this should be labled as comedy.

Glory Days,

Do you acknowledge the fact, that science started cloud seeding and rain-making towards the end of the DustBowl?
If so, do you think they would stop at that? Or do you think they would keep pushing boundaries and being innovative and continue to go from the theoretical to actual?

Well when do you acknowledge the Dust Bowl ended? most of what i read says the drought ended in 1940, cloud seeding wasnt discovered until 1946. As for the actual end of the dust bowl, i believe the acres and acres of trees planted west of the drought area helped bring rain naturally. And there is a difference between cloud seeding and actually making clouds and changing the weather.

Is light speed travel real? i mean scientist all over the world are trying to do it, but at the moment its as real as it is on Star Trek.

Ventura seems obsessive about 9/11 in the show. I'm sure we don't know the whole, complete story but some of the leaps they take need some actual evidence to believe and they don't have any evidence.

I loved when he was pointing through the window of the door saying "this is what they dont want us to see". A.) if they didnt want you to see it, they wouldnt leave it in plain sight of a window. B.) i was expecting to be some huge discovery like E.T. walking around in there, not chunks of metal that may or may not be girders.

Glory Days wrote:
doesnt have to be the government, can be any person who has facts, not just theories. like i said earlier, people have been wanting to control the weather since man first walked the earth, the concept is nothing new. show me facts that its happening and i will believe you.

From the disclaimer of that report:

Many "conspiracies" began as just theories and were later proven true.

You need to analyze all possible evidence and reach a decision based on that.

Glory Days wrote:

From the disclaimer of that report:2025 is a study designed to comply with a directive from the chief of staff of the Air Force to examine the
concepts, capabilities, and technologies the United States will require to remain the dominant air and space
force in the future.

From page 31 of that report:

In contrast, artificial weather technologies do not currently exist.

You are correct they did not exist in 1996. Do you not think they have made some advancements in this technology in the last 13 years?

eersandbeers wrote:

Glory Days wrote:
doesnt have to be the government, can be any person who has facts, not just theories. like i said earlier, people have been wanting to control the weather since man first walked the earth, the concept is nothing new. show me facts that its happening and i will believe you.

From the disclaimer of that report:

Many "conspiracies" began as just theories and were later proven true.

You need to analyze all possible evidence and reach a decision based on that.

While that MAY be true, there are many more conspiracies that have not been proven.

That's what is so great about a conspiracy; people can twist and distort facts all they would like and it is very difficult to prove or disprove with concrete evidence.

The government had a conspiracy theory about Iraq having WMD's and supporting Al-Qaeda. Neither were substantiated, but it was an unfounded conspiracy theory, just like most others are including most of what has been shown on Ventura's show, Loose Change, JFK assassination, people saying we never landed on the moon, chemtrails, etc, etc. JMO

dwccrew wrote:
While that MAY be true, there are many more conspiracies that have not been proven.

Because they're nonsense.

Tonight theory is on Global warming.Should be good.

eersandbeers wrote: You are correct they did not exist in 1996. Do you not think they have made some advancements in this technology in the last 13 years?

Yes...I suspect the efforts and results are on par with the StarWars program.

The Body is going to be cracking some skulls tonight! i love when he gets pissed when someone wont talk to him.

I really enjoyed the one about 9/11 until the guy told him he had knowledge that the hijackers to control of the plane before it took off.

haha this show is getting more comical by the moment, that last scene just put it over the edge.

queencitybuckeye wrote:

dwccrew wrote:
While that MAY be true, there are many more conspiracies that have not been proven.

Because they're nonsense.

Precisely.

dwccrew wrote:

While that MAY be true, there are many more conspiracies that have not been proven.

That's what is so great about a conspiracy; people can twist and distort facts all they would like and it is very difficult to prove or disprove with concrete evidence.

Well they stop being conspiracies when they are proven true. I can name at least 10 so called "conspiracies" that skeptics would have said could never happen.


I'm actually disappointed in this show though. I underestimated Ventura's lunacy and his ability to present a coherent argument. This would have been a great show if there was another host who approached this issues more seriously.

eersandbeers wrote:

dwccrew wrote:

While that MAY be true, there are many more conspiracies that have not been proven.

That's what is so great about a conspiracy; people can twist and distort facts all they would like and it is very difficult to prove or disprove with concrete evidence.

Well they stop being conspiracies when they are proven true. I can name at least 10 so called "conspiracies" that skeptics would have said could never happen.


I'm actually disappointed in this show though. I underestimated Ventura's lunacy and his ability to present a coherent argument. This would have been a great show if there was another host who approached this issues more seriously.

Ok, name 10. Also, I never stated that all conspiracies are bogus, just that the majority of them are.

The people that do not believe something just because the government says it are no different than those who believe it just because the government says it. Either way, you did not come to your own opinion and relied on some higher "authority" (which is a joke because most politicians do not know what they are talking about even when they are technically right).f

While studies into weather warfare are probably underway and it might be a plausible tool in the distant future, it is NOT something that can be considered a sufficient tool right now. And by sufficient, I mean being able to use it in a predictable and intended manner. We do not have the computing power and/or knowledge right now to accurately predict weather patterns in the short term; therefore, it follows that any use of weapons to affect said weather are inherently unpredictable themselves.

It is like the schmucks that get on TV to talk about their new currency trading tool that predicts currency markets. Markets and weather are equally unpredictable (and they may always be this way); do not let a schmuck tell you any different.

dwccrew wrote:

eersandbeers wrote:

dwccrew wrote:

While that MAY be true, there are many more conspiracies that have not been proven.

That's what is so great about a conspiracy; people can twist and distort facts all they would like and it is very difficult to prove or disprove with concrete evidence.

Well they stop being conspiracies when they are proven true. I can name at least 10 so called "conspiracies" that skeptics would have said could never happen.


I'm actually disappointed in this show though. I underestimated Ventura's lunacy and his ability to present a coherent argument. This would have been a great show if there was another host who approached this issues more seriously.

Ok, name 10. Also, I never stated that all conspiracies are bogus, just that the majority of them are.

1. Operation Northwoods
2. US government radiation testing
3. Operation Ajax
4. Lavon Affair
5. Gulf of Tonkin
6. Bilderberg admits they created the Euro
7. The Dreyfus Affair
8. Project MKULTRA
9. Nurse Nayirah
10. Tuskegee syphilis experiment



There are plenty more also.

I never said all conspiracies are true. I said you need to judge the evidence and make an informed decision.

eersandbeers wrote:

dwccrew wrote:

eersandbeers wrote:

dwccrew wrote:

While that MAY be true, there are many more conspiracies that have not been proven.

That's what is so great about a conspiracy; people can twist and distort facts all they would like and it is very difficult to prove or disprove with concrete evidence.

Well they stop being conspiracies when they are proven true. I can name at least 10 so called "conspiracies" that skeptics would have said could never happen.


I'm actually disappointed in this show though. I underestimated Ventura's lunacy and his ability to present a coherent argument. This would have been a great show if there was another host who approached this issues more seriously.

Ok, name 10. Also, I never stated that all conspiracies are bogus, just that the majority of them are.

1. Operation Northwoods
2. US government radiation testing
3. Operation Ajax
4. Lavon Affair
5. Gulf of Tonkin
6. Bilderberg admits they created the Euro
7. The Dreyfus Affair
8. Project MKULTRA
9. Nurse Nayirah
10. Tuskegee syphilis experiment



There are plenty more also.

I never said all conspiracies are true. I said you need to judge the evidence and make an informed decision.

I don't see how all of your examples have been proven. There is evidence leading to the conclusion that they may be true, but not all that you listed are concrete. Some are, some are not.

Also, I do look to Wikipedia for info., but I would think you could have provided other links for the info. than just Wiki for 9 out of 10 of your examples.

dwccrew wrote:

eersandbeers wrote:

dwccrew wrote:

eersandbeers wrote:

dwccrew wrote:

While that MAY be true, there are many more conspiracies that have not been proven.

That's what is so great about a conspiracy; people can twist and distort facts all they would like and it is very difficult to prove or disprove with concrete evidence.

Well they stop being conspiracies when they are proven true. I can name at least 10 so called "conspiracies" that skeptics would have said could never happen.


I'm actually disappointed in this show though. I underestimated Ventura's lunacy and his ability to present a coherent argument. This would have been a great show if there was another host who approached this issues more seriously.

Ok, name 10. Also, I never stated that all conspiracies are bogus, just that the majority of them are.

1. Operation Northwoods
2. US government radiation testing
3. Operation Ajax
4. Lavon Affair
5. Gulf of Tonkin
6. Bilderberg admits they created the Euro
7. The Dreyfus Affair
8. Project MKULTRA
9. Nurse Nayirah
10. Tuskegee syphilis experiment



There are plenty more also.

I never said all conspiracies are true. I said you need to judge the evidence and make an informed decision.

I don't see how all of your examples have been proven. There is evidence leading to the conclusion that they may be true, but not all that you listed are concrete. Some are, some are not.

Also, I do look to Wikipedia for info., but I would think you could have provided other links for the info. than just Wiki for 9 out of 10 of your examples.

Wiki can be very factual in their postings. Most of what is posted provides footnotes to reliable and verifiable sources..

Most of the 10 conspiaries posted have been highly corraborated by official released documents.

Footwedge wrote:

dwccrew wrote:

eersandbeers wrote:

dwccrew wrote:

eersandbeers wrote:

dwccrew wrote:

While that MAY be true, there are many more conspiracies that have not been proven.

That's what is so great about a conspiracy; people can twist and distort facts all they would like and it is very difficult to prove or disprove with concrete evidence.

Well they stop being conspiracies when they are proven true. I can name at least 10 so called "conspiracies" that skeptics would have said could never happen.


I'm actually disappointed in this show though. I underestimated Ventura's lunacy and his ability to present a coherent argument. This would have been a great show if there was another host who approached this issues more seriously.

Ok, name 10. Also, I never stated that all conspiracies are bogus, just that the majority of them are.

1. Operation Northwoods
2. US government radiation testing
3. Operation Ajax
4. Lavon Affair
5. Gulf of Tonkin
6. Bilderberg admits they created the Euro
7. The Dreyfus Affair
8. Project MKULTRA
9. Nurse Nayirah
10. Tuskegee syphilis experiment



There are plenty more also.

I never said all conspiracies are true. I said you need to judge the evidence and make an informed decision.

I don't see how all of your examples have been proven. There is evidence leading to the conclusion that they may be true, but not all that you listed are concrete. Some are, some are not.

Also, I do look to Wikipedia for info., but I would think you could have provided other links for the info. than just Wiki for 9 out of 10 of your examples.

Wiki can be very factual in their postings. Most of what is posted provides footnotes to reliable and verifiable sources..

Most of the 10 conspiaries posted have been highly corraborated by official released documents.

Agreed.

I also posted Wiki because I'm trying to give you a basic summary of the conspiracies and not a detailed analysis. Wikipedia has been found to be as accurate as any encyclopedia and they provide sources.

And every single one of those I posted are true. They aren't conspiracies, but former conspiracies that have been proven correct.

Another new episode on right now.

Here's what I wonder...for people who believe in "conspiracy theories", what would have to happen for you to no longer believe in them. For instance, say, a 9/11 truther, what would have to happen for this person to give up the idea that it was an inside job. Etc.

It seems to me such folks require a lot of evidence to rebut presumed conspiracies, whereas, it seems to me, it seems to me there ought to be a higher amount of evidence of conspiracy required to rebut a presumed belief in X being what it appears on its face to be.

Perhaps cynicism creates the foundation of presuming conspiracy instead of presuming what X appears to be on its face?

BoatShoes wrote: Here's what I wonder...for people who believe in "conspiracy theories", what would have to happen for you to no longer believe in them. For instance, say, a 9/11 truther, what would have to happen for this person to give up the idea that it was an inside job. Etc.

It seems to me such folks require a lot of evidence to rebut presumed conspiracies, whereas, it seems to me, it seems to me there ought to be a higher amount of evidence of conspiracy required to rebut a presumed belief in X being what it appears on its face to be.

Perhaps cynicism creates the foundation of presuming conspiracy instead of presuming what X appears to be on its face?

well i watched a special on the 9/11 one on the national geographic channel. everytime they would run a test or experiment to explain how things happend to disprove the truthers, the truthers just flat out denied thats how it happend or the experiment was wrong.