Calling all conspiracy theorists - do you believe in this one?

[Katman]

So let me ask a question in return: Do you think that an organization would spend the millions (probably more like Billions) to fly planes around the world, to either influence the Weather or to spray some substance into the upper atmosphere. The follow up question is - what would be the point? People tend not to spend money and resources unless there is some form of Reward or pay-off.

Well John Brennan seems to consider a programme costing $10 billion per year as 'relatively inexpensive'.

https://www.cia.gov/news-information...relations.html

[sugilite:Me]

When you said that you saw them on the West Coast, was that NZ or USA?

NZ, I have seen trails here in arkansas, but not the exact same looking ones I was seeing on the West Coast of The south Island. From where I lived I could see from Westport-ish, to the Heaphy track and a bit beyond.

[carbonhed]

NZ, I have seen trails here in arkansas, but not the exact same looking ones I was seeing on the West Coast of The south Island. From where I lived I could see from Westport-ish, to the Heaphy track and a bit beyond.

Never met anyone from Arkansas before... do you have a banjo and a hankering for prescription opiates?

[Banditbandit]

NZ, I have seen trails here in arkansas,

[Graystone]

What you explained, was what you wanted it to be.

Not what is actually is.

When you continued to redefine words and meanings and ignoring the meanings that were explicitly stated in the sources you provided I gave up. That's not a Debate, that's your mental gymnastics.

Now that, is projection. Do us all a favour and fuck off until you lose the self delusions, you're as bad as conspiracy theorists in this regard.

[sugilite:Me]

Okay - so you ask a question - Fine. Are you satisfied with the answer? Because your statement about your memories as a Child suggest you have nagging doubts.

While I accept it can be all that you say, I have nagging doubts because just that one plane was leaving that signature, and it was the only one that came back again. I saw other planes leaving just little contrails just minutes later, ones that disappeared 60 seconds later, but no point comparing as different altitudes blah blah.

So let me ask a question in return: Do you think that an organization would spend the millions (probably more like Billions) to fly planes around the world, to either influence the Weather or to spray some substance into the upper atmosphere. The follow up question is - what would be the point? People tend not to spend money and resources unless there is some form of Reward or pay-off.

Would an organization spend a ton of cash for nefarious means? Yes, absolutely yes.
What would be the point?
One word - resources. A heck of a lot of wars are about resources. Even a fair few started on the pretext of religion in my opinion, were really about acquisition of resources.

Looking at World history, time and time again, new and previously unknown technology has been used to annihilate people that are holding resources others want.

Yes, for sure there is the extreme tribes of conspiracists that are down the bottom of the garden with their tin foil hats on. However, to my way of thinking, the people that consider themselves educated, and have what appears to be near blind faith that big pharma, big chemical companies, shadowy lobby groups steering governments all over the World etc, would never do anything as dastardly as fuck over everybody in the worst possible way except themselves - should also be down the bottom of their gardens - only with titanium hats on, because everybody knows that titanium is much higher tech and advanced than that puny tinfoil eh.

In principle, I like science, and in it's purest form is a great source of truth, facts and surety of how things work - very comforting. However, with the way the World appears to still work, lobby groups and big corps fund so many science studies, and transparency is actively avoided. It is extremely murky at best to clearly define which science has been untainted by corruption at high levels, levels scientists themselves will likely be completely oblivious to.

Evil is very much still alive and kicking. So I have a few questions for you Demonlord.
Where is it that you get this faith that humanity has changed to the point where powerful people and organizations now only have humanities best interests at heart?
Where is it that you think powerful evil people have gone? I'm talking about people that run organizations that have demonstrably in the past funded both sides of a world war, people who think nothing of exterminating millions of souls and the very same people that will now be looking at fast dwindling World resources likely thinking that as they are the ones with the power and ability, their final solution is justified in carrying out at any cost? Do you think such people are no longer around?

[Graystone]

Yep, I can accept that, and the thought occurred to me the planes could also be flying a lot higher than previously and as carbon head pointed out they could also be just kicking off the cloud seeding - even though the oddly rippled clouds do look different from non seeded ones.
So just my question remains about who is paying for these expensive flights for the mystery plane that is not carrying freight or passengers and just happens to be the one that seems to kick of the cloud seeding? I honestly are not expecting an answer on Kiwibiker or anywhere else for that matter - even if the mystery financial party could be found it, I'm sure the answer would hidden behind the good old "commercially sensitive" tag.

Surveying?

[husaberg]

I watched the plane go by turn around and come back - it was easy to see it doing that with the trail it was leaving behind. I saw it do that the 5 mornings out of the 7 that I watched it all going on for.

So you could you tell it was the same plane? Also how can you tell that plane/s were not changing direction after takeoff or simply going into holding paterns over a airport.

[pritch]

When you said that you saw them on the West Coast, was that NZ or USA?

Sorry, gotta ask. Who TF would be seeding clouds on the west coast of NZ. The residents have probably got webbed feet from their exceedingly generous rainfall.

[TheDemonLord]

Now that, is projection. Do us all a favour and fuck off until you lose the self delusions, you're as bad as conspiracy theorists in this regard.

There's that Nerve again.

An no, no projection - but do tell us why NZ isn't using a Fractional Reserve system again - Based on the sayso of someone with Zero economics qualifications again (Bryan Gould)... That one was hilarious. Especially when Don Brash (Former Governor of the Reserve Bank) correctly described the NZ banking system in the article you posted:

The banking system does create money. When Bank A lends money to one of its customers, the customer may use those funds to buy something from somebody who banks with Bank B. Bank B then finds itself with an additional deposit, a part of which it can lend out to its customers (keeping some of the additional deposit as a liquidity reserve). So an initial loan may end up considerably increasing the total lending by the banking system.

Or when you deliberately misinterpreted Profit AS Capital to mean Profit FROM Capital, in order to shoe-horn it into your world view.

[TheDemonLord]

Well John Brennan seems to consider a programme costing $10 billion per year as 'relatively inexpensive'.

https://www.cia.gov/news-information...relations.html

Indeed - and reading that article he outlines what the benefits of such a programme could be: a reversal of Global Warming. And he quickly addresses some of the potential problems of such a potential programme.

If you want to take his speech as writ - would you be happy with a reduction in Global Warming?

[TheDemonLord]

While I accept it can be all that you say, I have nagging doubts because just that one plane was leaving that signature, and it was the only one that came back again. I saw other planes leaving just little contrails just minutes later, ones that disappeared 60 seconds later, but no point comparing as different altitudes blah blah.

And that, is my issue - there are some known variables that easily and readily explains that situation, before resorting to the more exotic.

Would an organization spend a ton of cash for nefarious means? Yes, absolutely yes.
What would be the point?
One word - resources. A heck of a lot of wars are about resources. Even a fair few started on the pretext of religion in my opinion, were really about acquisition of resources.

First part - sure - not going to argue in principle, but what resources are you referring to? Take the link that Katman posted for example - $10 Billion, reduce Global Warming - if we take the theoretical and assume it to be ready - that sounds like a bargain to me. Is the stated goal of a reduction in Global Warming a resource, possibly could be argued. Is it nefarious? Depends.

Looking at World history, time and time again, new and previously unknown technology has been used to annihilate people that are holding resources others want.

I'll concede the principle of your point - that advances in Tech usually involve advances in Weaponary - but I think you're overstepping the mark slightly - the history of 'super-weapons' isn't as cataclysmic as you make it out to be (with a few notable exceptions).

Yes, for sure there is the extreme tribes of conspiracists that are down the bottom of the garden with their tin foil hats on. However, to my way of thinking, the people that consider themselves educated, and have what appears to be near blind faith that big pharma, big chemical companies, shadowy lobby groups steering governments all over the World etc, would never do anything as dastardly as fuck over everybody in the worst possible way except themselves - should also be down the bottom of their gardens - only with titanium hats on, because everybody knows that titanium is much higher tech and advanced than that puny tinfoil eh.

Do Big companies sometimes act innapropriately - Sure.
Do Lobby governments have an undue influence on political parties - Also, sure.
Do we have examples of when something untoward has happened - Absolutely.

So you may be thinking I agree with you and in part, I do. But that's half the story. Let's take this statement: "Would never do anything as dastardly as fuck over everybody in the worst possible way except themselves" - This cuts to the heart of the matter - without everybody else, such an action is pointless.

I've got all the money and no-one to lord it over (pun intended) - it rather defeats the purpose. In nearly every expose of corporate misdeeds - it's always been a limited number of people that have been fucked over (not justifying it, but want to make the point) - Fucking everyone over is unproductive and unprofitable, whereas sometimes fucking a percentage of people over HAS been productive and profitable in the short-term

which leads to my second point here - we know that companies are occasionally rather Naughty because invariably they get Exposed - the link I posted earlier about the relationship between time, number of people and the probability of something being kept secret is extremely relevant here - Nothing stays secret. When things are uncovered, if they meet the required burdens of proof - then from there a series of events is set in motion.

In principle, I like science, and in it's purest form is a great source of truth, facts and surety of how things work - very comforting. However, with the way the World appears to still work, lobby groups and big corps fund so many science studies, and transparency is actively avoided. It is extremely murky at best to clearly define which science has been untainted by corruption at high levels, levels scientists themselves will likely be completely oblivious to.

Sure, but then you're left with a predicament - Either you throw all of it, because you can't trust it even though most will be accurate, or you have to retract such a blanket statement and assess each bit of research on it's own merits.

Evil is very much still alive and kicking. So I have a few questions for you Demonlord.
Where is it that you get this faith that humanity has changed to the point where powerful people and organizations now only have humanities best interests at heart?

Come now - you complimented me on being a Black Belt on putting words in people's mouths, and then you try the above? Tsk Tsk.

No - I don't have that faith. What I do have faith in, is self-interest - Powerful people and organizations want to stay in that position. In order to do so, fucking everyone over can work, but it is ALWAYS a short-term strategy.

A more robust longer-term strategy is not to fuck everyone over, lest those people in turn, fuck you over (as has been the case on numerous occasions), I've outlined about that above. Consider a game - you could win by killing the enemy Team, the problem is - you'd not be able to play the game again. Not being able to play again means that you loose.

Where is it that you think powerful evil people have gone? I'm talking about people that run organizations that have demonstrably in the past funded both sides of a world war, people who think nothing of exterminating millions of souls and the very same people that will now be looking at fast dwindling World resources likely thinking that as they are the ones with the power and ability, their final solution is justified in carrying out at any cost? Do you think such people are no longer around?

I think you are stretching quite a bit in certain areas. Evil people are the same place they have always been. In terms of being Powerful - I'm assuming you're alluding to the Corporate Psychopath - with that statement - the thing is, they don't do as well as you'd think: "destroy shareholder value, tending to have poor future returns on equity." - this reinforces the theme of my main point - it's not a viable long term solution - and that mechanism is what tends to deal with and depose such people rather nicely.

[Graystone]

Or when you deliberately misinterpreted Profit AS Capital to mean Profit FROM Capital, in order to shoe-horn it into your world view.

Sounds like you want to pick this up again, you bowed out last time so here's a refresher of the last post...

Did you just try an argument from authority with a high school class? No source for the term you tried to use, no working definition, yup, it's clear you are just making shit up.

We're talking about fixed assets, depreciation is one option to change the book value; just changing it like you suggest is not an option, that's just not even close to how accounting works.

No, but it's a link supporting one's own viewpoint, something you have yet to provide, despite you being the one who made the claim. It describes many things, FRB is just one of those.

There's no risk of not being rewarded.

Figured you wouldn't last much longer once even Katman started showing you up. Thanks for playing though.

Shall we continue on in the correct place?

[Katman]

If you want to take his speech as writ - would you be happy with a reduction in Global Warming?

Do you actually think the CIA are renowned for their honesty and transparency? Or for being forthcoming with information?

When the CIA admit to anything, I'm more inclined to ask "ok, so how much aren't they admitting to?"

[Katman]

If you want to take his speech as writ - would you be happy with a reduction in Global Warming?

And what if it eventually transpires that stratospheric aerosol injection causes more problems than it solves?