|
|
weatherman714
tagged & banned
Joined: 11 Jun 2005
Posts: 953
Location: Maryland |
USAF 100% responsible for Severe Weather 3/30-04/03
 Sun Apr 23, 2006 5:00 am
|
 |
|
After extensive research and analysis using my weather model, there is no question the USAF is 100% responsible for the massive severe weather outbreak over the US from 3/30/06 to 04/02/06. The weather modification for this severe weather outbreak began SW of Hawaii on 03/22/06 with continued operations around Hawaii until 03/25/06. They initiated a powerful storm system over Hawaii which built a ridge of high pressure off Baja CA, which moved Northeastward over the Southwestern US, as the USAF sprayed their counter-clockwise spray off the West Coast, backed up the trough to continue the heavy rains over CA, OR, and WA, and allowed for the ridge off of Baja, CA to move NE into West Texas and to push warm air into the Central US where it should not have been.
As a matter of fact, April should have ushered in a winter storm for the Northeast on March 31st and April 1st, with snowfall acculmations of 8.4" in Pittsburgh,PA, 6.2" in Philadelphia, 4.5" in Atlantic City, NJ, 2" in Dover, DE, 4" in Baltimore,MD
Not only did I get screwed, but several people lost their lives across the Plains states, and the millions in property damage from the torandos and floods across the Western US. |
| |
|
|
climatechange
Joined: 23 Apr 2006
Posts: 11
Location: Madison, WI |
| Huh?
Sun Apr 23, 2006 3:38 pm
|
|
|
Weatherman714,
This is complete and utter nonsense. Do you have any idea how ridiculous this sounds? Half of what you describe wouldn't even make sense in a basic meteorology 101 course. At a minimum you need to realize that high pressure creates clear skies (and rotates clockwise in the N. Hemisphere) and low pressure creates clouds/storms (and rotates counterclockwise).
If the issues discussed on this web site ever want to be taken seriously it is going to have to first make sure that the scientific ideas presented are at least equivalent to the level taught in a 7th grade science class.
I would love to see your "computer model." Was it drawn up with crayons? |
| |
|
|
weatherman714
tagged & banned
Joined: 11 Jun 2005
Posts: 953
Location: Maryland |
| what a lark
Sun Apr 23, 2006 5:10 pm
|
|
|
lmao. Ok,ok,ok... only 4 years later, 4 years after I got into the Chemtrail science and figured out how the USAF modifies the weather, how to identify chemtrails on a Satellitte photo and Water Vapor Photo, after putting up over 50 discussions about how the USAF modifies the weather using chemtrails and upstaging the models, do I get these daily attacks....
If they weren't attacking, I wouldn't be right. 
No one has yet to out forecast me using chemtrails,until someone can put together a weather discussion that identifies chemtrails and shows how they are going to change the weather using model data, then by all means take my place, dethrone me and kick me to the ground. But that just not going to happen!! |
| |
|
|
climatechange
Joined: 23 Apr 2006
Posts: 11
Location: Madison, WI |
| dethrone you?
Sun Apr 23, 2006 7:12 pm
|
|
|
No one has attempted to "dethrone you" because they know your stuff is a joke. No one wants to waste their time...I'm beginning to wonder why I did as well? Just because you put up over 50 postings doesn't mean any of them are believable.
To be honest, I do usually find your stuff quite entertaining actually... sort of in the same way when I'm standing in line at the grocery store and see the front page of the National Enquirer. However, you cross the line when you start bringing this junk into discussions about severe weather that caused many deaths from tornadoes in the south during the past month. The family and friends of those people deserve more than some freak show discussion about how the USAF is responsible for their loved-ones deaths. I just hope the people that read discussions on this forum on a regular basis don't truly believe you have any real scientific training.
By the way, chemtrails cannot be seen on water vapor satellite imagery (and note how I've spelled the word "satellite"). It's time to come clean and admit that you really have no clue what you're talking about. There are people that read these postings that truly want to understand how the atmosphere works so that they can figure out what's going on in the sky above them. All you're doing is confusing them. |
| |
|
|
weatherman714
tagged & banned
Joined: 11 Jun 2005
Posts: 953
Location: Maryland |
| lol
Sun Apr 23, 2006 11:34 pm
|
|
|
What is there to understand?
Two sprays, one dries out the atmosphere and raising T,P and the other one uses a much more efficent version if you will of "dry ice" in making ice crystals in convection. If your able to create ice crystals in a cloud at 43F versus 32F or colder, then in most situations you will cause an increase in cloud development, which lowers pressures and temperatures.
Higher pressures cause clockwise turning, lower pressures cause counterclockwise turning. 22 yrs of experience of weather forecasting from a 3rd yr Physics student. It's a lot more education than you have. |
| |
|
|
astonished
Joined: 22 Apr 2006
Posts: 16
|
|
Mon Apr 24, 2006 12:03 am
|
|
|
I'm brand new to the forum and the topic itself - can't rely on mainstream media to give any reliable info - just want to say I'm interested in what Weatherman has to say, and the attacks by ClimateChange appear to be unwarranted. Suspicious in fact. |
| |
|
|
climatechange
Joined: 23 Apr 2006
Posts: 11
Location: Madison, WI |
|
Mon Apr 24, 2006 12:37 am
|
|
|
Well I'm glad you've managed to get to a third year of (college?) physics. Maybe in the fourth year you would have learned a bit more about the basics of thermodynamics. Again, your attempt at trying to sound scientific just continues to demonstrate how little you really understand about what you are talking about. My Ph.D. work was focused on the history of cloud seeding and inadvertent weather modification from airplanes. Your effort at trying to argue that cloud seeding by "if you will, dry ice" would cause a widespread increase in low pressure is fundamentally flawed because the lower pressure would only occur within the cloud itself. The areas around it would like have higher pressure (especially below the cloud). Also, what happens at night? Based on your simple logic the opposite effects would occur from the enhanced cloud cover thus offsetting the widespread increase/decrease in pressure during the daytime. But let me guess, you're assuming the seeding only occurs during the daytime and then somehow the clouds that were formed during the day suddenly disappear at night. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense.
I'm sorry but your 22 years of weather forecasting experience only counts if for legitimate purposes. Forecasting for yourself, your imaginary friends, or the imaginary world that you apparently live in, don't really count.
I'll make a deal with you, if you send me a copy of your "weather forecast model" and proof that you're employed at a legitimate weather forecasting agency, I'll send you a copies of the 15-20 articles I've published in legitimate scientific journals on this subject. |
| |
|
|
climatechange
Joined: 23 Apr 2006
Posts: 11
Location: Madison, WI |
|
Mon Apr 24, 2006 12:49 am
|
|
|
Astonished,
My apologies for coming across as "attacking" Weatherman714. It just frustrates me when I see posts on this forum from people pretending like they have proper scientific training on these subjects. I have no problems with tossing out new ideas and trying to better understand what's going on in the skies above us, but when improper scientific information is being provided and the readers are being misinformed about the basic fundamental processes of science I feel someone needs to step in provide a proper explanation. This person has been misinforming the forum for a long time now. I'm not trying to denegrate the subject at hand (chemtrails) but only trying to keep the explanation one that has proper scientific merit.
And please, don't automatically get "suspicious" just because someone steps in and disagrees with an idea that has been posted. Isn't that the idea with these forums? I'm sure others will want to call me a debunker but that's not the point here. I just thought Weatherman714 went too a bit far and needed to be called on it. |
| |
|
|
weatherman714
tagged & banned
Joined: 11 Jun 2005
Posts: 953
Location: Maryland |
| ahhhh
Mon Apr 24, 2006 2:17 am
|
|
|
See now your blowing some dust off your brain. *claps hands "It would only lower pressure in the cloud." exactly... if it lowers pressures within the cloud and the cloud is part of the jet stream, what is that going to do at the mesoscale level within the jet stream and how is it going to affect the weather 5 days from now?
If you increase the strength of a low pressure system through cloud seeding with plastic fibers with endothermic bacteria attached, how is in the increased strength of the low pressure system going to affect the outcome of the weather. If you lower the pressure over one region you only increase the pressure gradient over that region, which causes more air to rush into the cloud, thus slowing up the system and causing a counter clockwise spin at the mid and upper levels. Mid and Upper level ridges and troughs control the jet stream more than surface features. If your really a meteorologist you should know that by now.
If your a meteorologist you also know that it takes a certain artistic mind to predict the weather, so if you had a massive scale operation, wouldn't it be fruitful to be able to identify which spray you were spraying where so your meteorologists could get a visual for where you would need to spray and then run it through a computer model to fine tune the outcome? |
| |
|
|
starman1
Joined: 29 Sep 2005
Posts: 1498
Location: Earth |
|
Mon Apr 24, 2006 5:36 am
|
|
|
Hey climatechange,
quote:
My Ph.D. work was focused on the history of cloud seeding and inadvertent weather modification from airplanes.
That sounds pretty interesting, I'm curious about the "inadvertent weather modification from airplanes" part of that. Maybe you could share parts of your dissertation here sometime. I think it's a great thing to have someone here with a Ph. D. anywhere near the related sciences. And no ones calling you a debunker... Welcome!!! |
| |
|
|
starman1
Joined: 29 Sep 2005
Posts: 1498
Location: Earth |
|
Mon Apr 24, 2006 6:04 am
|
|
|
I would probably wager there was insufficent data to make any strong conclusions about it one way or the other, eh? (inadvertent weather modification from airplanes.) Maybe you could share what you were able to find on the subject. I think it would be an interesting addition to whats being focused on here. Because I for one, do believe that chemtrails are indeed a reality, but I also don't believe they are responsible for all the weather related phenomena we are witnessing. I don't think they posses the energy needed to alter the atmosphere the way I am seeing it happening. And to just throw spray's into a randomly moving atmosphere and expect to control or direct weather systems, with any amount of accuracy or direct precision, I believe would be an absurd assumption. There is surely something greater happening here. |
| |
|
|
climatechange
Joined: 23 Apr 2006
Posts: 11
Location: Madison, WI |
|
Mon Apr 24, 2006 12:47 pm
|
|
|
Thanks Starman1...it's nice to hear from somone that doesn't automatically becoming offended when a poster writes in to disagree.
I"ll try to find some time later to get back into the discussion group as these issues are raised. I admire the passion of people that post on this forum, however, it is important to always try and stickas close to good science as possible otherwise people that lurk are going to just laugh and never come back.
Weatherman714 is breaking rule #1 of meteorology 101. Nothing is 100% for sure...to attribute the severe weather in the south to the USAF being "100% responsible" is enough proof for me that this person isn't a meteorologist and only rudimentary training at best. Once again the most recent post demonstrates a lack of thorough understanding as the discussion of low pressure in the cloud, leading to low pressure at the mesoscale, leading to low pressure in the jet stream is physical impossible. The energy transfer doesn't occur that way. Weatherman714, try looking up "Dines Compensation" sometime and maybe you'll learn that the type of rotation created at cloud level is opposite of what forms at the jet stream level in low pressure systems that form over the oceans (warm-cored lows). Ever looked at satellite imagery of a hurricane and noticed that the low clouds rotate counterclockwise and the high clouds rotate clockwise? This is low pressure in the low atmosphere being supported by high pressure aloft. Before your idea can be considered to have ANY merit at all you should tweak your fancy weather model to include this basic law of meteorology. |
| |
|
|
weatherman714
tagged & banned
Joined: 11 Jun 2005
Posts: 953
Location: Maryland |
| lmao rotf
Mon Apr 24, 2006 3:53 pm
|
|
|
Warm core lows... in March, over the Central EQ Pacific, during a La Nina? You don't know what your talking about. You come in here, throw a couple of terms around that do not even come close to describing the situation SW of Hawaii on 3/22/06 and then call me a fraud all in the same breath. If you have a PhD in meteorology as you claim, you've sure missed out on a lot of physics classes. Because what you've just told me is evaporational cooling and its reverse process do not exist and that microbrusts do not exist either. I.E. you full of S***
If water is extracted from the atmosphere, the region that it is extracted from becomes warmer. Therefore within that region the pressure and temperature must rise if we consider constant volume. All forces act on another, and if an area of the jet stream with high humidity was sprayed with particles that absorb water vapor down to 30% RH, then the temperature must rise accordingly within that layer of air. If the pressure is higher over the affected region then the air disperse according to the pressure gradient to its surroundings. Therefore the jet will be accelerated to the east of the center of the targeted region and slowed to the west of the targeted region. It turns the jet stream more clockwise. As air is accelerated or any object in the atmosphere for instance, the greater effect of coriolis has on the object, therefore as we accelerate the jet stream it is going to turn more clockwise than it would have. |
| |
|
|
climatechange
Joined: 23 Apr 2006
Posts: 11
Location: Madison, WI |
|
Mon Apr 24, 2006 6:34 pm
|
|
|
Weatherman714,
I get the sense that you're feeling the heat. I'm not sure you know how to deal with someone actually challenging your crazy ideas for a change. First of all, warm-cored lows occur all the time in March near Hawaii. Just because March seems cold around here doesn't mean it's the same way there. That is when they have their highest sun angle and thus, greatest amount of energy exists for heating. Also, we may be in a weak La Nina phase right now but that really is having only a small influence on the water temperature near the Hawaiian Islands. The cooler water is much further south. I haven't looked at the weather conditions near Hawaii on March 22nd as it really doesn't matter...your idea is so full of scientific holes. But beyond the poor meteorology, please offer some sort of proof that the USAF is spraying such a huge amount of chemicals. How do you determine this? And then how do you associate these changes with specific amounts of snowfall reduction and severe weather enhancement more than 3000 miles to the east? With the level of precision that you describe from your fancy "weather model" you are claiming to be able to forecast things better than any of the most sophisticated computer models in the world. Are you using a crystal ball? If you are so good at this please let me know when and where the next severe weather outbreak will occur so that I can alert some people and try to save lives. Why didn't you use this advanced knowledge to warn the people in New Orleans about Katrina?
Please keep these entertaining half-scientific explanations coming as I'm now using them to show my meteorology class examples of "bad science". This is a classic case of someone how knows just enough to look like an idiot. For instance, in your last posting you throw in the comment about microbursts. Huh? I've never mentioned a word about microbursts in my previous postings nor anything that is related to them. Microbursts are gusts of wind that come towards the ground on the leading edge of a severe thunderstorm. What does this have to do with ANYTHING we've been talking about?! And please don't tell me they are the source of tornado development because they are not (I'm anticipating your half-science understanding of thunderstorms as well). Just don't try to use fancy words unless you can put them into the correct context.
Looking forward to your next posting. |
| |
|
|
mr. jones
Joined: 03 Mar 2006
Posts: 1899
|
|
Mon Apr 24, 2006 8:56 pm
|
|
|
I hadn't posted on these particular threads before basically because I took a couple of things for granted.
The basic logic i follow when i hear the word "science" come up is this.
SCIENCE IS CENSORED!
and if anyone says they should get the establishment's o.k. on the debate, well then that just tells me the debate simply isn't going to get anywhere near the real truth of the matter
One thing is for certain at this point in time, chemtrails have several objectives and ingredients, all depending on where you live and other factors.
Oh and by the way i can assure you 100%, those objectives aren't for your best interest.
The folks behind this operation are playing very, very sick games and we just happen to be a zero to the left.
Don't look to the establishment for answers, you won't get them. |
| |
|
|
 
|
|
 Goto page
1, 2 Next
All times are GMT. The time now is Fri May 25, 2012 1:55 am
|
|
|
|
|
Login
