“Weather wars” theorists claim Hurricane Harvey was engineered, “steered” toward Houston as a “weather terrorism” weapon

Monday, August 28, 2017 by: Mike Adams http://www.naturalnews.com/2017-08-28-weather-wars-theorists-claim-hurricane-harvey-was-engineered-steered-toward-houston-as-a-weather-terrorism-weapon.html

(Natural News) We’re bringing this claim to your attention because a growing number of observers, websites and analysts are concluding that Hurricane Harvey was “engineered” and made into a “weather weapon” through a combination of ground-based temperature manipulation tools and “chemtrail” seeding.
Yes, it sounds absurd at first, until you realize that Al Gore tells us that human activity controls the climate every day. It’s called “climate change,” and in fact, Al Gore and the climate alarmists directly tell us that we created Hurricane Harvey and all the other “extreme” weather events anyone sees. Weather modification, in other words, has become the de facto belief of climate alarmists. The entire mainstream media routinely insists that hurricanes, droughts, floods, snowstorms and tornadoes are all unintentionally created by human activity.
The key difference between Al Gore and the “weather wars” theories is that those who believe in weather wars insist these hurricanes are deliberately created, selectively amplified and steered into selected targets. Al Gore believes hurricanes are created by Man, in other words, and the weather wars theorists say they are precisely controlled and deployed as weapons of terrorism to inflict economic damage and achieve psychological goals involving terror and death.
This claim seems absurd to most people at first glance, but there is a growing community of weather skeptics who insist that such events are not accidents but weapons. That’s why we’re covering this story: Not as an endorsement of such conclusions but rather as a look at a curious corner of the internet where weather wars, weather modification and geoengineering have become popular, alternative explanations for significant weather events. In fact, there are at least two key patents (linked below) that describe this technology in great detail, including a “space-based power system” that can alter “weather elements” including hurricanes. (Keep reading for details…)
One of the most popular sites asserting such claims is WeatherWar101.com, whose author — a former network engineer — explains:
For ten years, I have been proving the irrefutable reality of daily manufactured flash flood deluge and severe weather – every single day. Denying the reality of these daily manmade weather events is akin to denying the existence of the combustion engine, and it is just as easy to prove. If you can understand boiling water, you can understand where trillions of gallons of water vapor come from that create and fuel the daily trillion-gallon floods we see washing a different community away, somewhere in the world. This isn’t debatable, and it is as easy to observe as sunrise.
Unless I have the names mixed up, the author seems to go by the name of “Sofia Smallstorm” (to avoid being identified by name, of course) and goes to great lengths to protect his or her identity. This person also wrote the foreward to No Natural Weather: Introduction to Geoengineering 101.

The site has published a 14-minute analysis of Hurricane Harvey, asserting that the hurricane was augmented by “On-Land Water Vapor Generation from Texas, Louisiana, etc.” The video description also states, “It’s also no coincidence that Hurricane Harvey is hitting the United States, 25 years to the day after Hurricane Andrew hit Florida. Since all of these storms are very clearly and very obviously deliberated manufactured, this “Anniversary Hurricane” was clearly intentional.”
Another video from APlaneTruth.info offers a more detailed explanation of “weather geoengineering” phenomena and how they say it relates to Hurricane Harvey, citing numerous patents, weather control conference, military technology and so on:

Do water vapor generators exist that can unleash clouds?

The idea of land-based water vapor generators that could contribute any meaningful amount of water to Hurricane Harvey seems absurd to those who have never looked into all this. According to recent estimates, Hurricane Harvey dumped 11 trillion gallons of water on Houston and surrounding areas. For any land-based machinery to contribute even 1/1000th of that volume — just 11 billion gallons of water — would take a massive fleet of mechanized water vapor generators burning through an enormous quantity of fuel or electricity. That seems unrealistic by any rational analysis.
Yet as the BBC video shows in the following video clip (starting at 15:12), there do exists large buildings that literally generate massive clouds and rainfall. Before I saw this video, even I had no idea such buildings existed. Watch the BBC explain:
Despite the existence of the technology, it is difficult to imagine the existence of such a massive operation operating covertly. That’s why the existence of a large-scale water vapor generating network seems highly unlikely. Besides, solar power does all that work for free by warming the oceans and evaporating water into the storm system. Trying to augment 11 trillion gallons of water evaporation carried out by the sun seems futile. The forces of nature are so much larger than anything mankind can contribute to them that supposing we can generate massive storm systems seems rather unlikely.
At the same time, so does the idea that human activity can drastically alter Earth’s climate in the first place. Despite all the hysteria and fear mongering of the climate change alarmists, human activity is nothing but a tiny sliver of contribution to the grand-scale phenomena driven by solar activity, volcanoes and other such events.

Weather modification technology does exist (read these patents to see for yourself)

There’s no question, by the way, that weather modification technology exists and is in widespread use across the globe. Weather control advocates are currently citing this U.S. patent #20100074390 A1, titled, “Method for weather modification and vapor generator for weather modification.”
As the patent summary states:
A nuclear fusion reactor (2) or nuclear fission reactor (22) is used as a heat source. A heat exchanger (11 or 37) that contains water to be heated (15) is used for water vapor generation. A circulating pipe (10 or 26) through which a fluid for cooling the nuclear fusion reactor or nuclear fission reactor or for conducting heat exchange circulates is disposed so as to extend in the heat exchanger and be in contact with the water to be heated. Water vapor is thus generated. This water vapor is jetted toward the sky at a state of collimation through a vapor discharge pipe (12 or 36). A cloud for blocking sunlight is formed in the sky from the water vapor jetted to reduce the temperature of the earth surface. This enables a weather modification without discharging any greenhouse gas, e.g., CO2.
Another U.S. patent (#20100224696 A1) is entitled, “Weather management using space-based power system.” It describes a space-based technology for generating and controlling hurricanes:
Space-based power system and method of altering weather using space-born energy. The space-based power system maintains proper positioning and alignment of system components without using connecting structures. Power system elements are launched into orbit, and the free-floating power system elements are maintained in proper relative alignment, e.g., position, orientation, and shape, using a control system. Energy from the space-based power system is applied to a weather element, such as a hurricane, and alters the weather element to weaken or dissipate the weather element. The weather element can be altered by changing a temperature of a section of a weather element, such as the eye of a hurricane, changing airflows, or changing a path of the weather element.
Weather modification technology isn’t a conspiracy theory, either: It’s already in use! For example, this article from SingularityHub describes Dubai’s “weather wizards” and how they use advanced electronics to create rain. It’s not a conspiracy theory; it’s just clever physics:
Meteo Systems, a Swiss company [is] developing a technology they’ve dubbed Weathertec. The idea is to erect giant ionizers wherever you’d like to have some rain. If the ambient humidity in the area reaches the required minimum of 30%, then you turn the ionizers on and start pumping electrons into the atmosphere. Assuming that you have high temperatures, the electrons will rise with the heat and water molecules will start condensing around them. At this point, you have clouds that will produce rain once they are dense enough.

Adding to the intrigue of all this, Bill Gates announced serious funding for “seawater-spraying cloud machines” designed to generate rain-producing weather systems for targeted communities. As Inhabitat.com explains:
The Microsoft founder recently announced plans to invest $300,000 into research at the University of Calgary for unique solutions and responses to climate change. Part of that research included lab tests on machines that suck up seawater and spray it into the air, seeding white clouds that reflect rays of sunlight away from Earth. Silver Lining’s floating machines can suck up ten tons of water per second. If all goes well, Silver Lining plans to test the process with 10 ships spread throughout 3800 square miles of ocean.

By the way, that was seven years ago, in 2010. Do such weather-generating fleets already exist? If so, they’ve been kept very quiet.

Another popular site that reports on Geoengineering, by the way, is Geoengineering Watch by Dane Wigington. Very informative and interesting. Check it out.

The history of hurricanes shows that Mother Nature generates them without any human engineering at all

Creating rainfall, however, is a far cry from generating a hurricane and steering it onto an intended target. That idea would likely be considered outlandish by meteorologists and scientists. The far more likely explanation, of course, is that the coriolus effect — a derivative of a spinning globe — causes rotational forces in the atmosphere that spin storm systems one way in the Northern hemisphere and the opposite way in the Southern hemisphere. (That’s why hurricanes look like opposites of each other when comparing Northern vs. Southern hemisphere storms.) Solar-heated ocean water results in large-scale water evaporation, saturating the air with vapor. That vapor condenses due to changes in temperature or pressure, causing the formation of water droplets which are now heavier than air and therefore fall to the ground. With enough solar energy, natural forces can generate truly catastrophic storms.
To think that every major storm is a “weather weapon” generated by a nefarious operation seems far-fetched to me. But then again, so does Al Gore and all his nonsense prognostications from his quack science Church of Climatology. Nevertheless, “altering” or “steering” hurricanes is technically a far easier task than generating them wholesale. What some of the weather wars people are saying is not that the hurricanes are generated wholly by artificial systems but rather that they are “steered” or “influenced” in terms of their direction or intensity. Is that really possible? Multiple patents obviously say it is, and the U.S. patent office didn’t reject those patents, interestingly.
On the other side of the argument, history has recorded dozens of hurricanes striking Gulf Coast regions over the last century. Most of these hurricanes took place long before the rise of modern technology or exotic weather modification capabilities. So how are all these hurricanes explained? (Answer: Natural phenomena.)

Conclusion: Keep asking questions and stay curious, but also think critically

My conclusion in all this? Creative, critical thinking is a healthy practice, and I always encourage people to keep asking questions and challenge official explanations for everything. We do know we’re all constantly lied to by the fake news media about almost everything, from vaccines to economics to history. And don’t forget the “Russia! Russia! Russia!” conspiracy theory that’s been pushed by the fake news media for the last 18 months, based on absolutely nothing but faked sources and shoddy journalism.
If there’s anything I can say about the weather wars websites and commentators, it’s that I applaud all efforts to challenge current paradigms with clear thinking, and I readily admit I’m no expert in weather modification technology. Perhaps there are things I will learn in the future that will change my own view on this subject. Until then, I hope to encourage critical thinking about everything, which means that I don’t believe anything by default.
The mainstream media is lying to us all the time. Most of what’s labeled “mainstream science” is often just a consensus collection of corporation-induced lies. Mainstream medicine is a corruption racket shrouded in fake science and media propaganda. You are right to question everything for the simple reason that almost everything you’re told is complete bulls##t. Yet that doesn’t justify believing every alternative theory, either. You need to think critically about which theories you believe vs. reject. For example, I’ve publicly stated that the Flat Earth theorists are flat-out wrong (although they do offer a fun thought experiment to play with). I also think Ray Kurzweil’s singularity is a misguided pipe dream rooted in self-delusion and an unhealthy God complex.
Can hurricanes be artificially generated in totality? Almost certainly not. Can they be steered into intended targets? It seems incredibly unlikely, but within the realm of technical feasibility. Does weather modification technology exist? Absolutely, yes. But that doesn’t mean that every weather event is a nefarious plot. We live on a dynamic, chaotic planet that’s home to all sorts of bizarre natural phenomena. Although I know as a fact that the status quo can fake the news, brainwash the masses and pull off massive false flag events, I very much doubt they can fake entire hurricanes.
Do you have a different take on all this? Do your research. Think critically. Don’t believe everything you read, view or hear. Most importantly, make up your own mind and don’t let the establishment tell you what’s true, because the establishment is lying to you about almost everything.

O WHO’S BEHIND IT? (PART FOUR OF WHAT’S REALLY GOING ON ...              ~ hehe my guess ...

I know, I know: this is the longest multi-part blog I've written on this website, and I promise, sooner or later it will end and we'll move on to other topics (of which there are plenty). But I think the story of the ramming of the US Navy's Arleigh Burke class Aegis missile frigates is important, both for what they're telling us, and what they're not telling us. This fourth part is necessary because there's one final question to be considered, one that leads to a rather different area of high octane speculation. That question is simply: "Who's behind it?" In this respect, my high octane speculation today, compared to that of the first three parts of this blog, has even less twig underneath it than yesterday's. We are standing at the tip of the twig with our full weight with nothing but air beneath us. Nonetheless, I think it's essential to speculate here.

Who's behind it?

Readers who have been following these blogs will recall that I believe that it is necessary to view the USS Donald Cook incidents, the Fitzgerald and the McCain incidents, "whole," for the simple reason that to my mind all four incidents (remember, there were two with the Donald Cook) show signs of some sort of technologically induced deliberate external influence in the operations of the ships. It was not mere "crew" or "officer" incompetence. As I've pointed out in the previous parts of this multi-staged blog, in the case of the Donald Cook incidents, the Russians were clearly responsible, and have recently claimed responsibility for it in their media.

In consideration of the question "Who's behind it?" let's look at the two main contenders, Russia, and China.

Was it Russia?

Russia, as indicated, is a contender simply for the reason that the Donald Cook incidents were clearly initiated by that country. It is important to this question, however, to consider the conditions under which Russia sent its messages in the Donald Cook incidents. In both cases the Donald Cook was operating, so to speak, in Russia's back yard and during a period of high tension, during which rhetoric in the United States' leadership was approaching the "complete hysteria" zone of the Anti-Russia meter. During these times there were also "ratcheted up" signals of possible dramatic expansion of the American campaign against Syria and even one against Iran. Faced with the potential of war in the region, I suspect that the Donald Cook incidents, and particularly the first one, were designed not as hostile actions but as warnings to carefully consider the consequences of a military confrontation between the two nations.

In the case of the last two incidents, however, we have a case of actual ramming, with human costs in injuries and lost lives involved. I doubt highly that Russia would, in the geopolitical tensions in North Korea, Japan, and that part of the world, have risked the actions against the Fitzgerald, and similarly with the McCain with tensions so high between the USA and China in the South China Sea and the Malacca Straits.  It simply is ratcheting up tensions needlessly and risking too much to do so. The message was sent and "received" in the Donald Cook incidents, and there was no need to reinforce it. These considerations apply regardless of what the actual mechanisms causing these incidents was: electromagnetic systems interference, remote mind manipulation, or faulty computer chips or some combination of them all. Russia would have everything to lose, and little to gain, by sponsoring such attacks.

Which brings us to the next main contender:

Was it China? As we noted in the previous parts of this blog, there was a peculiar progression evident in the Fitzgerald and McCain incidents. The Fitzgerald incident did not provoke much more than tight-lips, but the McCain incident, following so closely upon it, forced the Navy to state a position, which, you'll recall, was initially the "incompetence hypothesis," which moved, quietly in the past few days, to an admission that the naval staff has "suspended all operations", and was undertaking a review of "everything," including crew training, management, and so on. During these admissions, various military officers of flag or general rank have floated the "cyber-hacking-faulty computer chips from China" meme.

From one point of view, this is certainly possible, given that the USA has shipped much of its crucial industry overseas under the various "free trade" agreements forced on the government by Mr. Globaloney, beginning with GATT(General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade).  The USA and China are certainly also at loggerheads over Chinese claims in the South China Sea and over China's "One Belt One Road" project. China, for its part, has been making slow and steady progress on the latter, and this past year we've seen the first freight trains run all the way from China to the United Kingdom, and back again. However, there are strains in the Chinese economy, and the biggest problem for the Chinese leadership remains the management of its enormous population in a land mass that cannot sustain the food needs of the population. Geopolitically, China has much to lose by risking such actions in my opinion.

There's another consideration to entertain here: assume, for a moment, that the claims of corrupted Chinese computer chips in the US military's systems are true. This would constitute a "hole card", so to speak, which would be a crucial force multiplier in situations of actual military confrontation and hostilities. Under such conditions, in my opinion it would be doubtful that the Chinese government would reveal the fact during such comparatively "low level" incidents. It would be much more likely to do so under conditions in which - God forbid - American military assets and Chinese military assets began actually shooting at each other. Showing the hand at this stage of the game only alerts the USA that its electronics and computer systems "have a problem." Russia, as noted, has only revealed a limited aspect of its capability, leaving one to guess what the full measure of their capabilities actually are.

Which brings us to a third possibility, the most "high octane" speculation of them all: some other party, possibility an extra-territorial actor, is in play, and is attempting to create tensions between these three powers. Regular readers here and of my books will know that I have posited such an "extra-territorial actor" in my various books on post-war Nazi survival, and did so again in my book on 9/11, Hidden Finance, Rogue Networks, and Secret Sorcery. In the latter, I posited not two operational levels to 9/11 - the public one and the covert one of rogue networks within the American security and intelligence apparatus, the "typical" scenario of most "911 truth" researchers - but that that second deeper level was itself penetrated by an even deeper level, an extra-territorial one of international extent. Indeed, I pointed out the pre-911 statements of Russian economist Dr. Tatyana Koryagina which warned of an attack on US soil by precisely such a network.

It stands to reason such an entity would not simply cease to operate. However, it might be objected at this juncture that in the case of the Fitzgerald and McCain incidents that we see no corresponding "operations" or attacks against Russian or Chinese interests. Granted, this is a problem, but not one that is entirely fatal to the speculative hypothesis, provided one is willing to widen the context and dataset a bit, for there have been such incidents. Recall only those strange explosions at Chinese chemical plants just a few years ago. At that time there was speculation that the USA had used its alleged "rod of God" technology, i.e., space-based kinetic weapons, to take out the Chinese plants. Again, I doubted at the time that the USA would (1) risk such an action when the consequences would be dire and (2) reveal the existence of such a capability. Another, extra-territorial entity, bent on creating tension between the three powers, might be willing to do so. Similarly, there were Russian incidents where their own sophisticated systems did not perform "up to specification," so to speak. Recall only the incident at Sevastopol, during an exercise and "show" for the civilian population when a missile firing was conducted, and the missile misfired. Recall also the incident at the Russian powerplant near Murmansk, when the power plant exploded. At the time, Russian state-controlled media was speculating that this may have been the result of deliberate action and sabotage.

Of course, all of this is speculation, and your guess is as good as mine.