Fake Snow Conspiracy, and The CIA's real weapons to do it.

[nullie]

Verifiable and falsifiable research has very specific definitions (http://www.openscience.org/blog/?p=312). These fall directly in line with the the idea of reproducibility. What are the mechanisms for mind control, weather control, etc.? More specifically: where are the research papers that show the mechanisms and how to achieve mind control and/or weather control? Why isn't there any peer reviewed research about them? The only thing this supposed PhD has done is write vague nonsensical books that describe a conspiracy -- he hasn't provided any scientific evidence or given any mechanisms to show that these things actually exist -- so it's impossible for a scientist to actually verify or to falsify what he is saying... this is what is meant by verifiability and falsifiability. Any person can say something and pretend it is true, but if you can't provide a reproducible mechanism that allows someone to verify or falsify what you are saying:  then it isn't science!

 

And again, you are going with the argument of authority when you say he worked for the DOD, CIA, blah blah. This isn't a valid point of argument and I honestly don't even know who this guy is anyway. I can find absolutely no independent information regarding him outside of his conspiracy theories. The best I can find is conspiracy theory websites stating that he worked for XYZ and has ABC degrees. Anyone can say they have a PhD, worked for numerous three letter agencies, and write a random conspiracy theories. Moreover, anyone can make up a false persona and create a false history regarding that persona.

The problem with what is verifiable and non verifiable, is the only way its useful is if you as the public has access to the technology and information yourself to do it, which you do not, and so you have to create an exception to that logic because its classified and restricted. Also, public researchers cannot even be trusted with telling the truth, and peer review is a joke because too many have NDAs and ties to the government or private entities, meaning they cannot and do not want to disclose secrets about their work. Because of secretiveness in these realms, researchers might even be prone to seed lies to throw off the public and competitors.

 

For this reason I think its safe to trust the work of people who have all the signs of telling the truth. Dr. Robert Duncan is one such person to believe in and is also backed up by Mark Phillips, a CIA operative who worked in MKULTRA. The pair together solidify that this is real, especially considering how much FOIA backed coverage is already out there about these programs.

 

How does mind control work? Its all about magnetism, and electromagnetism, and working with particles and atoms. Microwaves can change these properties of individual neurons which are made up of atoms. Thereby controlling the function of the brain becomes a piece of cake when each neuron in targeted individually, through its atoms and particles. This is the secret sauce to mind control.

 

Mind control has always been possible. Its limitations are solely that of an engineering and device manufacuring standpoint, which is limited to rich private companies and the military/government. It is a truth that the government has the most advanced imaging devices on planet earth, more advanced than an MRI machine, and its deployed in all radar and satellite systems. These technologies also being designed for reading remote galaxies do a very good job at locally imaging peoples brains and bodies at resolutions 65000 times what Hubble telescope was doing in 1990 when they deployed it (power adjusted per Moore's law, guiding exponential increases in optics and sensor and CPU power). There are 32 of these machines watching us today, NRO/NSA deployed. There are also numerous phased array antenna dishes and radar towers built up all around us. I hear the United States has several times what Russia has, and they have 7 such dishes. The technology essenially allows individual electrons to be imaged, hense neurons, and also energy to be directed to any point on earth, whether it's a building or person or their brain/atoms.

[Dick Montage]

peer review is a joke

 

How does mind control work? Its all about magnetism, and electromagnetism, and working with particles and atoms

 

How you expect anyone to ever take you seriously...

[nullie]

How you expect anyone to ever take you seriously...

I am repeating widely available information, for one. Just because you aren't gifted with insight, doesn't mean others aren't.

[FloatingFatMan]

He probably thinks that just because an MRI can be used to show images of the insides of the human body, something else using magnets can see our thoughts.

 

Bless. :p

I am repeating widely available information, for one. Just because you aren't gifted with insight, doesn't mean others aren't.

 

No, you're repeating absolute gibberish.

[+Raze Subscriber²]

I am repeating widely available information, for one. Just because you aren't gifted with insight, doesn't mean others aren't.

 

Widely available doesn't make it factual.  And I would agree, you seem to be gifted, but not in any way I would be crowing about.

[nullie]

He probably thinks that just because an MRI can be used to show images of the insides of the human body, something else using magnets can see our thoughts.

 

Bless. :p

 

No, you're repeating absolute gibberish.

Try reading Dr. Robert Duncan's book. He says MRI is a technique that can be used on the whole world, for long range imaging, which radar systems have used similar techniques for years.

 

I also have this scientific White paper, published by Dr. Carole Smith on the subject in 2003, "on the need to revise the diagnostic criteria on psychosis in light of todays mind invasive technologies". It was published in several psychology magazines and basically cannot be refuted.

 

those interested should read what it says about this astro influenced technology.

 

http://www.globalresearch.ca/on-the-need-for-new-criteria-of-diagnosis-of-psychosis-in-the-light-of-mind-invasive-technology/7123

 

So far its been you guys disruptively posting rubbish and baseless remarks.

[+Raze Subscriber²]

Try reading Dr. Robert Duncan's book. He says MRI is a technique that can be used on rhe whole world, for long range imaging, which radar systems have used similar techniques for years.

 

I also have this scientific White paper, published by Dr. Carole Smith on the subject in 2003, "on the need to revise the diagnostic criteria on psychosis in light of todays mind invasive technologies". It was published in several psychology magazines and basically cannot be refuted.

 

those interested should read what it says about this astro influenced technology.

 

http://www.globalresearch.ca/on-the-need-for-new-criteria-of-diagnosis-of-psychosis-in-the-light-of-mind-invasive-technology/7123

 

So far its been you guys disruptively posting rubbish and baseless remarks.

 

[adrynalyne]

I don't even understand why you guys are trying to reason with him.

 

[+Frank B. Subscriber²]

nullie: Seek help. Now.

[Skiver Veteran]

I like to think I have a fairly open mind, whether I choose to believe in this right now is irrelevant.

 

what I need to ask, as if you believe that these things are possible (I really don't care if it is or isnt) and there are governments and corporations out there doing these things but keeping it secret. To quote something I believe nullie wrote earlier around it being difficult to prove because going anywhere near said facilities will end up with you dead...

 

If the above will get me killed, how are all of these said scientists trustworthy? I mean, if they had any shred of evidence that these "people" wanted to be kept quiet, why haven't they been silenced?

 

Like I say, I really don't care about any of this, so I'm not reading books or watching 2 hour long YouTube videos, but I suspect what these people should be saying is why they think these things are possible not that these things are happening.

 

[FloatingFatMan]

Try reading Dr. Robert Duncan's book. He says MRI is a technique that can be used on the whole world, for long range imaging, which radar systems have used similar techniques for years.

 

I also have this scientific White paper, published by Dr. Carole Smith on the subject in 2003, "on the need to revise the diagnostic criteria on psychosis in light of todays mind invasive technologies". It was published in several psychology magazines and basically cannot be refuted.

 

those interested should read what it says about this astro influenced technology.

 

http://www.globalresearch.ca/on-the-need-for-new-criteria-of-diagnosis-of-psychosis-in-the-light-of-mind-invasive-technology/7123

 

So far its been you guys disruptively posting rubbish and baseless remarks.

 

MRI's can only work in very short range.

MRI's require no metal objects within the scanning field.

MRI's take quite a long time to scan.

MRI's use HUGE amounts of power just to scan a really small area.

 

Thought waves are not visible to MRI's.

 

What you claim is happening, is physically impossible.

[mudslag]

I am repeating widely available information, for one. Just because you aren't gifted with insight, doesn't mean others aren't.

 

 

All you are repeating is a delusional's wet dream. As for the gifted...

 

[snaphat (Myles Landwehr) Member]

The problem with what is verifiable and non verifiable, is the only way its useful is if you as the public has access to the technology and information yourself to do it, which you do not, and so you have to create an exception to that logic because its classified and restricted. Also, public researchers cannot even be trusted with telling the truth, and peer review is a joke because too many have NDAs and ties to the government or private entities, meaning they cannot and do not want to disclose secrets about their work. Because of secretiveness in these realms, researchers might even be prone to seed lies to throw off the public and competitors.

All you are trying to do here is make science into a conspiracy theory itself: the modus operandi of a conspiracy theorist. When someone brings up a point of evidence that doesn't make sense for what the conspiracy says the answer is always: these people can't be trusted, research publications can't be trust, they are hiding he truth and in on the secret.

 

Science is not a conspiracy theory. What it is is verifiable and falsifiable so it doesn't really matter whether you trust it, what matters is whether it is repeatable in practice and that's what makes it trustworthy. It has nothing to do with "technology" because publications aren't technology. What they are is hypothesis with methodology to show something is true/false.

 

How does mind control work? Its all about magnetism, and electromagnetism, and working with particles and atoms. Microwaves can change these properties of individual neurons which are made up of atoms. Thereby controlling the function of the brain becomes a piece of cake when each neuron in targeted individually, through its atoms and particles. This is the secret sauce to mind control.

Personally, I don't think you know much about magnetism and electromagnetism. You can't use satellites in the sky (read as: things at a distance) to induce localized magnetic fields at a distance (a la MRI style). (1) the strength of force is dependent on the distance from source (which in your case is a massive amount of electricity in a satellite inducing a magnetic field somewhere far away). (2) if you generated a large and strong enough magnetic field to "target" someone it would hit everything else in the path also. (3) the magnetic field lines would become wider and wider arcs as the distance increased so you couldn't pinpoint anything. (4) in order to control the path of the magnetic field lines you would need a huge magnet (in sizes proportional to the earth), otherwise, the portions of the magnetic field with high strength wouldn't reach the earth. (5) a magnetic field of that size and strength would be comparable to the magnetic field of the earth and immediately noticeable to anyone taking measurements, as well as, affect other things on earth.

 

Then on the other hand there is the EM radiation in the form of microwaves you are describing. This is completely unrelated to magnetism and imaging brains as you were describing it. These are completely separate concepts. I'm not sure how you are proposing they are related or how "control" would work with microwaves. Microwaves are non-ionizing radiation so they don't have enough energy to do much of anything to the human body at low concentrations. And at high concentrations they would just heat up particles (like a microwave does) and potentially cause cancer. 

 

This is my point: you obvious have no background in how these things work and neither does the supposed guy with the PhD you are talking about. I can do an arm-chair debunking of what he says using simple physics 101 concepts: this is why he has no publications or methodology on the subject, because these things don't jive with physics. Before you take someones word for something, you should become educated in the field; otherwise, you have no business trying to pass what you are saying off as fact.

 

... These technologies also being designed for reading remote galaxies do a very good job at locally imaging peoples brains and bodies at resolutions 65000 times what Hubble telescope was doing in 1990 when they deployed it (power adjusted per Moore's law, guiding exponential increases in optics and sensor and CPU power). There are 32 of these machines watching us today, NRO/NSA deployed. There are also numerous phased array antenna dishes and radar towers built up all around us. I hear the United States has several times what Russia has, and they have 7 such dishes....

I'm an electrical and computer engineer and I don't even know what you are talking about. Power adjusted per what? What does that even mean? You are saying words, but they don't have any meaning. Moore's law is specifically about transistor counts and has absolutely nothing to do with CPU power, sensors, or optics.

 

The technology essenially allows individual electrons to be imaged, hense neurons, and also energy to be directed to any point on earth, whether it's a building or person or their brain/atoms.

Of course energy can... within the context of EM waves. That's not exactly news worthy and it has nothing do with magnetic fields. To be perfectly clear: a magnetic field isn't energy, it is a force (the relationship is the following in mechanical terms: energy = force * distance). You are just making the same mistake that people who believe in the myth of perpetual motion and free energy machines make: they don't understand what energy is or what a force is or how the two are related.

 

So far its been you guys disruptively posting rubbish and baseless remarks.

Debunking claims of this being backed by science (via pointing out there is no verifiable evidence for what is being said) is not baseless. Or to say that another way: pointing out what science is, is not baseless. Similarly, using physics to debunk the physically impossible is not baseless...

[FloatingFatMan]

He's basically taking random scientific sounding words and sticking them together to attempt to form sentences.

 

 

 

 

And failing miserably.

[mudslag]

Basically nullies argument breaks down to...

 

"Person X makes extraordinary claims, person X also claims to be have a Ph.D, therefore extraordinary claims made by person X is valid, without actual peer reviewed backing." 

 

 

Oh yeah and person X has a book out for sale with said claim. 

[Praetor]

Oh yeah and person X has a book out for sale with said claim. 

 

but of course he has, don't you think that "deep investigation" using "facts" and "logic" requires a whole book full with top secrets that no one admits? It's a bargain!

[Hum]

I don't know about dumping billions of tons of snow on the USA, but there are definitely Weather control experiments going on.

Especially by divisions of the US Navy.

If they were going to do weather control, I should think they would try this on an unfriendly country, rather cost the USA billions of dollars in clean-up, accidents, lost business, etc.