Kentrailer wrote:In my opinion, there was actually a tsunami. The reason I say this is that many people here in California saw part of it:
There are literally thousands of amateur videos of the affects of the tsunami here in California. There was a tsunami, they may have exaggerated the devastation in some of the Japan photos, but I'm not sure where you're going with this daozen.
It is my belief the earthquake was a direct result of HAARP, or similar ionospheric weapon.
nonhocapito wrote:it is just as equally possible that "HAARP" might be a psychological weapon more than anything else. So I'd keep the "beliefs" open about this.
burningame wrote:The color of the water looks very strange to me, a uniform jet black which is even more prominent on the hi-def videos. Now I understand that the tsunami picks up all kinds of dirt as it moves over land, but I can't see how it would be completely black. Shouldn't it be more a non-uniform brown, with all sorts of colors mixed up in it?
Could this be a clue to the way it was produced (faked, or tweaked from reality) - all the better to make the CGI process more effective perhaps?
nonhocapito wrote:Kentrailer, saying that there are "thousands of amateur videos" won't do it, you know.
Besides, if you read back this whole thread you'll see that we have debated at lengths the mix of reality and truth in this story. Real earthquake, undoubtedly, and fake nuclear crisis... with a lot to discover and clarify in between.
As to the spectacular images of destruction brought by the tsunami, there are reasons to think that fakery was used to hype the destruction and catastrophic effects, to entertain and scare the population of the whole world.
Certain artificiality has been pointed out not only in the amateur videos but also with the reports from the area made in front of a green screen by possibly artificial journalists. You can say "people have seen the tsunami with their own eyes", but it remains that videos and reports have been faked. Once again, read this whole thread.
As to HAARP, you can say you have this "belief" -- many might share it with you on this forum: but it remains that none of us can prove it beyond any doubt, and it is just as equally possible that "HAARP" might be a psychological weapon more than anything else. So I'd keep the "beliefs" open about this.
Kentrailer wrote:Non:
What do you think about HAARP? You think it's just an experiment to measure the Aurora Borealis? The Russian Woodpecker.. also.. what was the point of that?
full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pR5l7z77QOM
Kentrailer wrote:Do you not find it strange that "scientists" are now claiming they have figured out how to predict an earthquake; the Ionosphere above it heats substantially before it happens? I mean, to me, that's evidence something is heating the ionosphere, which is in turn creating the earthquake. Maybe it means nothing to you that large facilities, such as HAARP Gakona, and Puerto Rico, or the Russian Woodpecker were built (that we know about) but to me, it says they're messing with the ionosphere.
nonhocapito wrote:Kentrailer wrote:Do you not find it strange that "scientists" are now claiming they have figured out how to predict an earthquake; the Ionosphere above it heats substantially before it happens? I mean, to me, that's evidence something is heating the ionosphere, which is in turn creating the earthquake. Maybe it means nothing to you that large facilities, such as HAARP Gakona, and Puerto Rico, or the Russian Woodpecker were built (that we know about) but to me, it says they're messing with the ionosphere.
What scientist? Are you sure of these statements you make? Are you sure of the purpose of those facilities? We already had this discussion a dozen times on this board, and I see that you, Kentrailer, are not a fan or reading this forum thoroughly-- which I insist you should do.
I said and I repeat what I always said about this issue: that none of us can prove it beyond any doubt, and I stand by my statement. This doesn't mean that I believe HAARP is not possible, or that I know for sure it is a scam and a psychological tool.
It is possible for it to be fake, just as it is possible for it to be real and, at this stage, I don't see why I should be more convinced by one possibility than the other. I like this issue to be open for me. You won't see me join the party of the "believers" any time soon.
About that video, let me get this straight: should we all be of a sudden convinced by a video that shows a bunch of diagrams and data of unknown origin? Making statements that it doesn't care to source and support? Why, exactly, because it fits with our desire to believe this story?
The whole HAARP idea has always been fed with data appearing to confirm a certain idea. So is the Nuclear hoax. It goes without saying that, if HAARP, pushed by the likes of Alex Jones and Ventura, was a global psychological tool like the nuclear hoax (with the added conspiracy factor) it would benefit from all sorts of data apparently coming from official sources. So does the UFO psyop. I wonder why on certain issues we assume the data circulating cannot be forged, when we know that all hoaxes and psyops we deal with rely on forged data that sometimes fools even scientists.
Kentrailer wrote:You seem like you are in a rage non.. calm down.
nonhocapito wrote:I said and I repeat what I always said about this issue: that none of us can prove it beyond any doubt, and I stand by my statement. This doesn't mean that I believe HAARP is not possible, or that I know for sure it is a scam and a psychological tool.
It is possible for it to be fake, just as it is possible for it to be real and, at this stage, I don't see why I should be more convinced by one possibility than the other. I like this issue to be open for me. You won't see me join the party of the "believers" any time soon.
About that video, let me get this straight: should we all be suddenly convinced by a video that shows a bunch of diagrams and data of unknown origin? Making statements that it doesn't care to source and support? Why, exactly, because it fits with our desire to believe this story?
The whole HAARP idea has always been fed with data appearing to confirm a certain idea. So is the Nuclear hoax. It goes without saying that, if HAARP, pushed by the likes of Alex Jones and Ventura, was a global psychological tool like the nuclear hoax (with the added conspiracy factor) it would benefit from all sorts of data apparently coming from official sources. So does the UFO psyop. I wonder why on certain issues we assume the data circulating cannot be forged, when we know that all hoaxes and psyops we deal with rely on forged data that sometimes fools even scientists.
nonhocapito wrote:Kentrailer wrote:You seem like you are in a rage non.. calm down.
Sigh. Kentrailer. How about you leave the provocations out and respond to my observations instead.
daozen wrote:Well I see to many differences between HAARP and the Nuclear Hoax (fukushima I suppose?) to even compare them. Everyone in the world got their eyes stuffed with images and news on the earthquake/tsunami/nuclear whatever where as most in the world have no idea of what haarp is.
daozen wrote:Saying that it's "pushed" by Alex Jones and Jesse Ventura is absolutely irrelevant and a fallacy no?
daozen wrote:I mean what is it about "September Clues" that convinced you (I pressumed) the "fake" vids where not "faked", if that makes any sense, lol.
daozen wrote:What other explanation do you have for the fact that the whole hoax was built and shown for a specific date right after a quake. As far as I remember the fact that there was some sort of quake in Japan is a fact no?
Return to Worldwide media deceptions
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests