I watch the skies daily. I live in a rural area that does NOT have many flight paths over it. Yet, I see many airplanes flying over our valley, spewing stuff behind them that does not remotely resemble anything I saw as a child. Soon thereafter, these "trails" turn into tracks across the sky, they widen, they exhibit strange behaviours, by mid-afternoon, what should have been a blue sky day with a few fluffy clouds has turned into a silvery haze and sometimes what I call a "frankensky". These are my own observations. Couple that with the existence of patents for aerial spraying which go back decades, and admissions by governments that they manipulate the weather "to raise the level of the reservoir" for instance (in our area), etc etc etc. Then throw the likes of Bob McDonald of Communist Broadcast Corporation, oops I mean the Canadian Broadcast Corporation (CBC) Quirks and Quarks "science" show, interviewing scientists who claim that we may have to use geo-engineering techniques (some time in the future) to save the planet, as an interim measure until such time that we humans reduce our own carbon footprint, bla bla. They talk about these things as though it WILL BE a good solution - a psychological warfare trick, telling us what they are doing while pretending it might be necessary in the future, and at the same time we observe the skies and see plenty of evidence for these things happening right now, AND we have admissions that yes they have allowed companies to spray the skies for this or that purpose, ... what's that old expression? If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck...
Another point, I have in the past seen reports about snow samples and mountain lake water samples from high elevation sites which have shown various chemicals that should not normally be there. (I didn't keep these reports and don't have time at the moment to go digging for them, and so perhaps that will vindicate your assertion that there is no evidence....doesn't really matter to me; I still can use my own eyes to see the skies and observe the real effects.) I have heard plenty of fire behaviour specialists and actual long-time fire fighters who remark about the changed fire behaviour, they use words like "explosive, like nothing we used to see...", as though these forests had been sprayed with firecracker materials. That is precisely what is happening.
They tell us about humans being "the weather makers" and tell us it is all about our carbon emissions, but in reality it is "the weather makers" by geo-engineering and causing all the things they predicted would happen with "global warming", such as increased frequency and severity of storms and other weather events. Then when these severe storms happen, they say, "see? told you so!"
Climate change is always occurring and less than 2% is manmade yet there’s plenty of screams that we must do crazy stuff to halt our tiny contribution to it.
Stratospheric aerosolized spray is meant to reflect a tiny percentage of the solar light and heat as a way of reducing the solar effects.
Climate has been continuously changing and we are familiar with the ice age.
The stratospheric spraying is not a good idea. Two states legislators now have voted to ban them.
Let’s discuss this without xs passion and all remain friends.
It’s fascinating how all lies seem to share common traits: a similar build-up, structure, energy, and reaction. Take, for instance, this reaction: "I don't know why you posted this, but this is where we part ways." It’s a classic example of how disagreements often play out.
As someone who champions the truth, you’re naturally inclined to question everything. Yet, certain topics like "chemtrails," "ritual child sacrifice," "flat earth," and "the vaccine kills" are often considered off-limits. This selective skepticism is where the true deception of dialectics lies.
You’ve aptly pointed out various dialectical traps:
- CO2 will kill vs. Chemtrails will kill. In either scenario, nature is manipulated into a weapon against us.
- Covid kills vs. The vaccine kills. Whichever you believe, the outcome is a fatalistic view.
- Priests raping kids vs. Elites doing ritualistic sarifice of kids. Both narratives tell you they are out there to rape your kids.
- Discoveries of distant stellar systems by NASA vs. Flat Earth theories. Each claims to definitively understand the cosmos.
These are prime examples of how "they" have successfully muddied the waters with false dichotomies. Many unwittingly fall into these traps.
It’s crucial to take a step back and examine what these dialectics actually reveal. What common ground do these opposing views share? They paint a world where humanity is under threat, where faithful are raping children, and where we boast precise knowledge of the universe’s mysteries.
People detest uncertainty. They often prefer choosing a side in these dialectics over the discomfort of not knowing or choosing. Not taking sides is rarely seen as a courageous stand; on the contrary, we're often conditioned to believe that it signifies indecision or weakness.
As you continue on your path of radical truth-seeking, expect that some will inevitably turn away from you. The sad reality is that most individuals are unable or unwilling to step outside the dialectical framework that's been imposed upon them.
Dialectics, in my view, is the malady of our era. I may have misjudged the topics my previous assertions, but the ethos of enlightenment thinking persists. What should have been a journey towards understanding through diverse perspectives has devolved into partisan squabbles – perhaps it was always this way. Our challenge now is to rise above these divisive narratives, seeking a deeper truth that unites rather than fragments our understanding of the world.
Then call it teraforming. It is what it is. If it's not, then people should be outraged about the pollution in which is not allowed on main lining news.
i don't know why you posted this, but this is where we part ways.
This is why. IPS is not part of the lie world order pysop infrastructure of fear porn.
Amazing how widespread this psyop is in trutherville.
I watch the skies daily. I live in a rural area that does NOT have many flight paths over it. Yet, I see many airplanes flying over our valley, spewing stuff behind them that does not remotely resemble anything I saw as a child. Soon thereafter, these "trails" turn into tracks across the sky, they widen, they exhibit strange behaviours, by mid-afternoon, what should have been a blue sky day with a few fluffy clouds has turned into a silvery haze and sometimes what I call a "frankensky". These are my own observations. Couple that with the existence of patents for aerial spraying which go back decades, and admissions by governments that they manipulate the weather "to raise the level of the reservoir" for instance (in our area), etc etc etc. Then throw the likes of Bob McDonald of Communist Broadcast Corporation, oops I mean the Canadian Broadcast Corporation (CBC) Quirks and Quarks "science" show, interviewing scientists who claim that we may have to use geo-engineering techniques (some time in the future) to save the planet, as an interim measure until such time that we humans reduce our own carbon footprint, bla bla. They talk about these things as though it WILL BE a good solution - a psychological warfare trick, telling us what they are doing while pretending it might be necessary in the future, and at the same time we observe the skies and see plenty of evidence for these things happening right now, AND we have admissions that yes they have allowed companies to spray the skies for this or that purpose, ... what's that old expression? If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck...
Another point, I have in the past seen reports about snow samples and mountain lake water samples from high elevation sites which have shown various chemicals that should not normally be there. (I didn't keep these reports and don't have time at the moment to go digging for them, and so perhaps that will vindicate your assertion that there is no evidence....doesn't really matter to me; I still can use my own eyes to see the skies and observe the real effects.) I have heard plenty of fire behaviour specialists and actual long-time fire fighters who remark about the changed fire behaviour, they use words like "explosive, like nothing we used to see...", as though these forests had been sprayed with firecracker materials. That is precisely what is happening.
They tell us about humans being "the weather makers" and tell us it is all about our carbon emissions, but in reality it is "the weather makers" by geo-engineering and causing all the things they predicted would happen with "global warming", such as increased frequency and severity of storms and other weather events. Then when these severe storms happen, they say, "see? told you so!"
Yeah that would be insane, but what about the very visible ones we see multiple times per week?
Climate change is always occurring and less than 2% is manmade yet there’s plenty of screams that we must do crazy stuff to halt our tiny contribution to it.
Stratospheric aerosolized spray is meant to reflect a tiny percentage of the solar light and heat as a way of reducing the solar effects.
Climate has been continuously changing and we are familiar with the ice age.
The stratospheric spraying is not a good idea. Two states legislators now have voted to ban them.
Let’s discuss this without xs passion and all remain friends.
Great article, Tim.
It’s fascinating how all lies seem to share common traits: a similar build-up, structure, energy, and reaction. Take, for instance, this reaction: "I don't know why you posted this, but this is where we part ways." It’s a classic example of how disagreements often play out.
As someone who champions the truth, you’re naturally inclined to question everything. Yet, certain topics like "chemtrails," "ritual child sacrifice," "flat earth," and "the vaccine kills" are often considered off-limits. This selective skepticism is where the true deception of dialectics lies.
You’ve aptly pointed out various dialectical traps:
- CO2 will kill vs. Chemtrails will kill. In either scenario, nature is manipulated into a weapon against us.
- Covid kills vs. The vaccine kills. Whichever you believe, the outcome is a fatalistic view.
- Priests raping kids vs. Elites doing ritualistic sarifice of kids. Both narratives tell you they are out there to rape your kids.
- Discoveries of distant stellar systems by NASA vs. Flat Earth theories. Each claims to definitively understand the cosmos.
These are prime examples of how "they" have successfully muddied the waters with false dichotomies. Many unwittingly fall into these traps.
It’s crucial to take a step back and examine what these dialectics actually reveal. What common ground do these opposing views share? They paint a world where humanity is under threat, where faithful are raping children, and where we boast precise knowledge of the universe’s mysteries.
People detest uncertainty. They often prefer choosing a side in these dialectics over the discomfort of not knowing or choosing. Not taking sides is rarely seen as a courageous stand; on the contrary, we're often conditioned to believe that it signifies indecision or weakness.
As you continue on your path of radical truth-seeking, expect that some will inevitably turn away from you. The sad reality is that most individuals are unable or unwilling to step outside the dialectical framework that's been imposed upon them.
Dialectics, in my view, is the malady of our era. I may have misjudged the topics my previous assertions, but the ethos of enlightenment thinking persists. What should have been a journey towards understanding through diverse perspectives has devolved into partisan squabbles – perhaps it was always this way. Our challenge now is to rise above these divisive narratives, seeking a deeper truth that unites rather than fragments our understanding of the world.
Then call it teraforming. It is what it is. If it's not, then people should be outraged about the pollution in which is not allowed on main lining news.
I'm a little confused here.
1. I've seen loads of images of the sky with criss crossing white trails and I think I've seen a few skies myself showing these trails
2. Stratospheric Aerosol Injection is recognised as a technique although they put it into the conditional "would".
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratospheric_aerosol_injection
3. Geoengineeringwatch.org.
Have you watched The Dimming? I haven't yet though plan to.