However, it is the responsibility of the person himself to determine if he can view with enough discretion to be on the internet in the first place. If you have trouble, then they may need a break from online activity so as to further develop their cognitive abilities. If I started believing everything I read and I no longer knew what the truth was in my first years online, my parents would’ve just banned me from its usage until my thinking abilities developed a bit more.
In a sense, it’d be like someone shoplifting from a candy store and then blaming the owner for putting out a tempting display. A problem with society today is that a lot of people do not want to admit that they are (at least in part) responsible for anything negative that happens, but that it’s always someone else’s fault (because we see a trend in the ‘me’ generation where people think they are inherently perfect).
You could say that about any knew technology you have not seen yet.Then you would have egg on your face when they start selling it.And it is proven to work.Then how do you explain that we are having almost no hurricanes hit the united states.Besides the universe could have unknown energies in it that could be tapped to control hurricanes.The device could be tapping into this.To think other wise would be arrogant.Why be so judgemental.I do not believe reptilians control the world.A United Nations Treaty exists which pledges all member states to refrain from using Weather Control as a lethal weapon upon other states.
That’s an interesting standard for “proof”…
Well, if so, I’m happy to inform the world about my invention of the “Anti-Earthquake Eyeglasses” ™. I’m wearing my glasses all the time since 1987 and there has been no verified earthquake report in Germany ever since. Must work perfectly, then, yes?
That exactly is the problem with a proof that is based on something not happening, especially if the “something” is completely random and out of the boundaries of human control.
Fact is: No one knows why the US had a few years without major hurricane incidents.
But that doesn’t prove anything in regard to this machine. Religious folks might say the absence of hurricanes was caused by an act of God and not by this device. Others might blame the climate change. Or dumb luck. Are they wrong? Well, they can’t be, as they all have the same “proof” as you!
BTW, isn’t there a horrible drought in some parts of the US at this time? That must be caused by this machine! It is known! The raining stopped at the same time as the hurricanes! See where this leads us? Nowhere.
This is what I understand about this “David Wells Weather Control System”:
Allegedly Mr. Wells tried to build a Joseph Newman motor, a kind of perpetuum mobile machine (annotation: that has already been proven to be a hoax - multiple times). The experiment failed, but when he drove off to buy a new battery, he supposedly noticed a “strange hole in the clouds” above his workshop.
Wells does not give out the plans publicly for how to build these devices, but the parts for the machines “cost less than $200” and can be “built and assembled in an afternoon”. The machine operates on a 12-volt battery(!) and is drawing just a few mili-amperes, but can influence the weather over thousands(!) of miles (for reasons unknown). In addition to that, the machine is reported by Wells to “effect the speed of light”(!).
Come on! Seriously?
Wells just revolutionized our entire view of physics and yet he has not patented his miracle machine? How come the only sources for this are websites for nutjobs? Why hasn’t he gotten the Nobel prize, yet?
And which one of those refers to Mr. Wells’ $200 device - the one you made the topic of this thread and poclaimed as “proven”?
BTW, this is from the very website you linked to: “Once we realize God has allowed men who worship Lucifer to control the weather, even to the point of being able to use it as a weapon against all who live on the earth, the End of the Age is surely upon us.”
…and so on and so forth.
Dude, where do you keep finding those “hard facts” sites…
Did you look at this patent? 1. “US3564253 System and Method for Irradiation of Planet Surface Areas”, Inventor Arthur G. Buckingham, Westinghouse Electric Corporation, Issued/File Date, February 16, 1971/January 31, 1967.It does not matter religious beliefs of the persons who made the site.
@Ace: problem with that is a lot of those people are only going to want to get on the internet even more when you tell them to stay off. Worse yet those prone to distrusting authority figures are going to think it’s a conspiracy and that you want them off the internet because you’re trying to hide something from them.
What for? Unless Arthur G. Buckingham is actually David Wells in disguise, I don’t see what an existing patent (if it really exists) from 1967 has to with a machine from 1994, whose inner workings and function not even its creator bothers to explain…
To show that it is possible to control the weather.To lend some credence to my argument.Here is an article from The naked scientists websight.It is called Steering hurricanes out of Harm’s Way.
Ah, so. I’ve just modified my “Anti-Earthquake Eyeglasses” ™:
I have attached a hypercharged titanium corkscrew to it and now it can also split atoms. By your logic that’s totally credible, right? Since splitting atoms is possible and there are patents granted for methods to do it?
Look at this patent u.s. patent application 20100072297 describes a method for controlling hurricanes.
This is a patent for a method to produce artificial tornadoes.u.s. patent application 20110248498.
The topic of this thread you started is not: “Can weather be controlled?”
You chose to make this the topic: “Here is a great piece of technology. Used to control weather. This technology stops hurricanes and reduces their strength.”
So, this is you selling something shady you found on the internet as fact. Again.
It doesn’t matter if other patents in weather control do exist, because that doesn’t prove one bit that Mr. Wells’ machine works.
You want to change the topic, away from Mr. Wells aparatus? Fine.
But stop pretending that a machine as described in your initial post is fact or that anything is proven.
The only way to prove that a weather device works is by what it does.And that means the weather.Would you believe it if was on video probably not because you would think it was alterd video.You would have to be there to believe it probably.
The first patent describes flying scores of jet planes into a hurricane. The difference in energy from the jet planes and a 12 V battery (as used in the machine by David Wells) is enormous. And the idea in the patent is just a concept. It has not been tried in practice.
Saying that the second patent is for making artificial tornadoes is a bit misleading. The patent describes an idea to heat the air above a power plant to create a flow of air through the plant which could be used to drive turbines.
@Lost: Why does it matter to you that others believe it? I mean you believe what you wanna believe and that’s great and there’s nothing wrong with letting others in on what you think, but it seems as though it bothers you when others don’t see things your way and I’m wondering why is that? So what
I’ve had plenty of discussions in my day, people disagree with one another sure and you want to argue your point no problem, just sayin if you get all bent outta shape when people disagree with you then you’re really only hurting yourself.
[You could say that about any knew technology you have not seen yet.Then you would have egg on your face when they start selling it.And it is proven to work.Then how do you explain that we are having almost no hurricanes hit the united states.Besides the universe could have unknown energies in it that could be tapped to control hurricanes.The device could be tapping into this.To think other wise would be arrogant.Why be so judgemental.I do not believe reptilians control the world.
This makes absolutely no sense. To cut out the useless information, you’re basically left with: ‘hurricanes are not hitting the USA, therefore the device is doing it and I can point at the sky above my head to prove it’s working.’ No. All that’s proving is you happen to have a nice clear sky and you don’t know if a device is ‘causing’ it or even if you’re anywhere near one. Pointing at conceptual patents on a random website is not proof. When you can put the device into fair testing facilities and make the results predictable, then you have scientific proof. Until then, the reason your sky is perfectly clear is because the clouds have not picked up any rain-water and the wind was calm for whatever reason that year (at a guess).
A United Nations Treaty exists which pledges all member states to refrain from using Weather Control as a lethal weapon upon other states.
If you look at music label contracts, you will find that many of them have clauses that state ‘I will control your music throughout the known universe on devices that are yet to be invented.’ That does not mean that the music company are able to distribute the artist’s music CD’s to the Andromeda galaxy (at least today), the point is if it ever reaches that stage, they have a contingency in place for it.
