How's about you get back on topic? Has anyone read the NSF report from 1965? Or are you more interested in deciding who used to be Marilyn Monroe?
The evidence is there if you want to find it. Let me spell it out for you:
1. Documented multinational experimental climate modification programs since (at least) the 1940's.
2. A treaty agreed to in the 1970's outlawing weather warfare.
The crucial bit you are missing is how any of this relates to contrails.
And that they outlawed weather warfare, so there's even less of a chance they're using it against citizens.
Your not really that dumb are you ? Read UN agenda 21, their own literature talks of reducing the world population by 70%. Taking land ownership away from privet citizens & using deceptive environmental laws & overlays to creating thousands of square miles of human exclusion zones. The reality total one corporation corporate control & self written licences to plunder the worlds resources. A sly underhanded way of removing common law rights & anyone objecting to their corporate greedy activities.
Funny, I couldn't find that in there at all. Could you please quote the document please?
http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/Agenda21.pdf
I obviously didn't read the entire 350 pages of it, but did search for the words "population reduction" which returned 0 results. I then searched for the words "70 per cent" and it returned 4 results.
The first result mentioned about reduction of childhood diarrhea by 50 to 70 per cent in developing countries
The second and third mentioned that desertification affected 70 per cent of the world's drylands
The fourth said that 70 per cent of marine pollution came from land-based sources.
So please cite your source instead of just mentioning some made up statistics.
I also looked it up and found nothing that supports charles bloomington's claim. Makes sense for a wannabe fe;er to lie in a thread about chemtrails.
Care to state if you are or aren't pro UN Agenda 21 & happy for its implantation world wide. First !!! then I'm happy to provide it.
Why? The 350 page pdf has been provided. You apparently already know where it "talks of reducing the world population by 70%." Just simply post the page number.
Here suck on this while I find you the main course.
The Delphi Technique
More and more, we are seeing citizens being invited to "participate" in various forms of council held meetings involving the community & local groups to "help determine" public policy in one area or another. We are supposedly being included to get "input" from the public to help officials make final decisions on community issues or whatever the particular subject matter might be. Sounds great, doesn't it? Unfortunately, surface appearances are often deceiving.
You, Mr. or Mrs. Citizen, decide to take part in one of these meetings. Generally, you will find that there is already someone designated to lead or "facilitate" the meeting. Supposedly the job of the facilitator is to be a neutral, non-directing helper to see that the meeting flows smoothly. Actually, he or she is there for exactly the opposite reason: to see that the conclusions reached during the meeting are in accord with a plan already decided upon by those who called the meeting.
The process used to "facilitate" the meeting is called the Delphi Technique. This Delphi Technique was developed by the RAND Corporation for the U.S. Department of Defence back in the 1950s. It was originally intended for use as a psychological weapon during the cold war. However, it was soon recognized that the steps of Delphi could be very valuable in manipulating ANY meeting toward a pre-determined end.
How does the process take place? The techniques are well developed and well defined. First, the person who will be leading the meeting, the facilitator or Change Agent must be a likeable person with whom those participating in the meeting can agree or sympathize with. It is, therefore, the job of the facilitator to find a way to cause a split in the audience, to establish one or a few of the people as "bad guys" while the facilitator is perceived as the "good guy." Facilitators are trained to recognize potential opponents and how to make such people appear aggressive, foolish, extremist, etc. Once this is done, the facilitator establishes himself or herself as the "friend" of the rest of the audience. The stage is now set for the rest of the agenda to take place.
At this point, the audience is generally broken up into "discussion groups" of seven or eight people each. Each of these groups is to be led by a subordinate facilitator. Within each group, discussion takes place of issues, already decided upon by the leadership of the meeting. Here, too, the facilitator manipulates the discussion in the desired direction, isolating and demeaning opposing viewpoints. Generally, participants are asked to write down their ideas and disagreements with the papers to be turned in and "compiled" for general discussion after the general meeting is re-convened.
THIS is the weak link in the chain which you are not supposed to recognize. WHO compiles the various notes into the final agenda for discussion? AHHHH! Well, it is those who are running the meeting. How do you know that the ideas on YOUR notes were included in the final result. You DON'T! You may realize that your idea was NOT included and come to the conclusion that you were probably in the minority. Recognize that every OTHER citizen member of this meeting has written his or her likes or dislikes on a similar sheet of paper and they, too, have no idea whether THEIR ideas were "compiled" into the final result! You don't even know if ANYONE'S ideas are part of the final "conclusions" presented to the re-assembled group as the "consensus" of public opinion.
Rarely, does anyone challenge the process since each concludes that he or she was in the minority and different from all the others. So, now, those who organized the meeting in the first place are able to tell the participants AND THE REST OF THE COMMUNITY that the conclusions, reached at the meeting, are the result of public participation. Actually, the desired conclusions had been established, in the back room, long before the meeting ever took place. There are variations in the technique to fit special situations but, in general, the procedure outlined above takes place.
The natural question to ask here is: If the outcome was preordained BEFORE the meeting took place, WHY have the meeting? Herein lays the genius of this Delphi Technique. It is imperative that the general public believe that this program is THEIRS! They thought it up! They took part in its development! Their input was recognized! If people believe that the program is theirs, they will support it. If they get the slightest hint that the program is being imposed upon them, they will resist.
This VERY effective technique is being used, over and over and over, to change our form of lawful!!! Constitution & lawful rights , intended by the Founding Fathers, into a "participatory deceptive democracy." Now, citizens chosen at large are manipulated into accepting present outcomes while they believe that the input they provided produced the outcomes which are now THEIRS! The reality is that the final outcome was already determined long before any public meetings took place,