Difference between revisions of "Talk:2024 Persian Gulf floods"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m (Fine, i'll leave the page.) |
|||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
:Just leave it as a deep event. Maybe the UAE was planning to go over to the [[gold standard]] or going to release [[Clinton body count|evidence against the Clintons]]😉? [[User:Terje|Terje]] ([[User talk:Terje|talk]]) | :Just leave it as a deep event. Maybe the UAE was planning to go over to the [[gold standard]] or going to release [[Clinton body count|evidence against the Clintons]]😉? [[User:Terje|Terje]] ([[User talk:Terje|talk]]) | ||
| + | :: I was expecting a serious discussion.... -.- | ||
Revision as of 20:21, 19 April 2024
Purpose
How do we know for sure it isn't a deep event? Geoengineering has been used much more often in this region, and is reported in military studies for theoretical weapon usage. We don't the exact reason yet who the UAE wouls sell or use their knowledge for, but let's say, the UAE is testing how strong they can use this for warfare as well, under the guise of stimulating farming and rainfall. It sounds far-fetched now, unlike Occam's razor, that it was just geoengineering gone wrong, but perhaps we'll look back in about 10 years when extreme weather situations occur in cities under close combat, and we'll look back at these "tests". Would this theory be enough to question if it was a deep event user:terje?
- Just leave it as a deep event. Maybe the UAE was planning to go over to the gold standard or going to release evidence against the Clintons😉? Terje (talk)
- I was expecting a serious discussion.... -.-
