I always like Walking in the Rain so no one can see me Crying. - Charlie Chaplin
Hurricane Helene -North Carolina LAND GRAB – to make room for TESLA mining in the EXACT same area? They want your land. FEMA Robbery in action. (psychopathinyourlife.com)
DAMS Create Droughts. WHY all the DAMS in Egypt Ethiopia Sudan Turkey Iraq & Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam? (psychopathinyourlife.com)
DAMS will DESTROY the RAINFOREST * Lula is a Lying TRANNY * Soil & Sediment Robbing of Nutrients and means to Survive = DAMS (psychopathinyourlife.com)
State-of-the-art dams, cascade reservoirs turn floods from beast into resource - Global Times
Hydroelectricity - Wikipedia
How Hydroelectric Power Works (tva.com)
How Is Electricity Generated From Hydroelectric Dams or Ocean Tides? - The Environmental Literacy Council (enviroliteracy.org)
![Trollskull Alley Noire [ENG/ITA] - Dungeon Masters Guild | Dungeon ...](https://i.gyazo.com/925f17d2d8dcfd72e12804aab661f5f2.png)
Some things children need to do in an emergency and how their phones can help:
- Call emergency services. Children should be taught to dial 911 or the appropriate emergency number on their phones. On many Android phones, pressing the power or side button five times in quick succession will start a countdown, after which the phone will call emergency services. On an iPhone, after pressing the side button five times, the "Emergency Call" option needs to be swiped to place the call.
- Provide accurate information. Children need to be able to describe the situation and say where they are when they call 911.
- Stay calm. It's important for children to remain calm and speak clearly when answering the 911 operator's questions.
- Know their home address. Children should help memorize their home address, which can be written down on an emergency contact sheet.
- Use a panic button. A panic button can be set up on a smart home device, such as a Philips Hue dimmer switch, to call specific numbers in the contact list.
- Practice. Role-playing a 911 call with the child can help them practice.
- Understand the risks. Children must be able to determine whether it is safe to call 911 from where they are. For example, they should be told to leave the house immediately if there is a fire.
- Follow directions. Children should follow directions and help with activities like bringing toys and furniture inside to prevent them from blowing away.
- Know basic first aid. Older children can be taught basic first aid techniques, but it's important to emphasize the importance of calling an ambulance first.
- Have a safety plan. Children should know what to do in the case of fire, including agreed escape routes and meeting points.
Three Gorges Dam – Major Concerns
- Structural Cracks
Shortly after its 2003 filling, inspectors detected around 80 hairline cracks in the dam. Officials stated they were repaired and within design tolerances, but critics doubt long-term durability. - Seismic Risks
The dam sits atop the Jiuwanxi and Zigui–Badong faults. Water pressure changes have triggered hundreds of small tremors, and experts warn reservoir-induced seismicity could exacerbate fault instability - Landslides and Bank Erosion
Rapid reservoir-level fluctuations have destabilized slopes. Over 4,600 landslide events were recorded in 11 months after initial filling; more than 7,400 hazard points have been identified since - Sedimentation and Water Pollution
Slowed river flow traps silt, gravel, pollution, and industrial runoff. This has caused harbor blockages and water quality degradation. Managing sediment and pollution has required massive investments . - Ecosystem Decline
The dam has disrupted fish migration, reduced downstream yields by up to 70%, and contributed to extinction of species like the baiji dolphin. - Social and Cultural Costs
Between 1.1 and 1.4 million people were displaced, and nearly 1,300 archaeological sites were submerged. Resettlements often shifted residents to unstable, landslide-prone terrain.
How It Works with Other Yangtze River Dams
China operates a coordinated cascade of dams on the Yangtze and its tributaries for flood control, power, and navigation. The system includes major dams such as:
- Three Gorges Dam
- Gezhouba Dam (downstream, run-of-river, 2,715 MW)
- Wudongde, Xiluodu, Xiangjiaba, Baihetan (on the Jinsha River upstream)
Joint Operation Strategy:
- Flood control: Upstream dams retain peak flows during heavy rains, reducing downstream flood risks.
- Hydropower synergy: Coordinated release of water produces electricity while maintaining reservoir safety.
- Navigation stability: Controlled flows ensure consistent shipping levels below Gezhouba and Three Gorges.
- Environmental flow management: Gradual releases support downstream ecosystems, though balancing this with power generation remains complex .
Recent Performance:
- In summer floods (e.g., 2020), the system—including 47 dams—reduced peak flows by about 30%, securing flood protection equivalent to a 1-in-100-year event globaltimes.cn.
Summary
The Three Gorges Dam faces significant long-term challenges: structural integrity, seismic activity, landslides, sediment buildup, water pollution, ecosystem damage, and social displacement. It operates as the centerpiece of a vast, integrated dam system aimed at flood control, hydropower production, and navigation support. While the cascade has demonstrably reduced flood impacts, it comes with a high environmental, geological, and society issues.
How Power is Generated and Transmitted from Dams:
Water Flow & Turbines:
- The dam holds back a reservoir of water.
- When water is released from the reservoir, it flows through intake tunnels or penstocks (large pipes) down to turbines.
- The force of flowing water spins the turbines.
Turbines Drive Generators:
- Each turbine is connected to an electrical generator.
- As the turbine spins, it turns the generator rotor, converting mechanical energy into electrical energy via electromagnetic induction.
Powerhouse / Power Station:
- The powerhouse is the facility built at the dam where turbines and generators are housed.
- The electricity generated here is typically at a medium voltage (e.g., 11kV to 33kV).
Step-Up Transformers:
- Near the powerhouse, transformers step up (increase) the voltage to a higher transmission voltage (e.g., 69kV, 138kV, or higher).
- Higher voltage reduces energy loss when electricity is sent over long distances.
Transmission Lines:
- The high-voltage electricity is carried away from the dam via overhead or underground transmission lines.
- These lines connect to the regional or national electric grid.
Substations and Step-Down Transformers:
- Near populated areas or industrial users, substations reduce voltage to safer levels for distribution.
- Distribution lines then deliver the power to homes, businesses, and industries.
Summary:
- The dam’s powerhouse is the actual power station where mechanical energy from flowing water becomes electrical energy.
- The power generated there is stepped up by transformers to high voltages for transmission.
- High-voltage power lines carry electricity from the dam’s power station to substations and eventually to end users.
The disaster in Texas is severe flash flooding along the Guadalupe River in central Texas, not a dam collapse. Here's the detailed situation:
What is the same? North Carolina had a dam overflow. Texas - also near a dam. China is now in a disaster zone from rain and DAMs in the area. Dams are sitting time bombs; they have a long history. What happens is quite simple, they create a lot of rain, the dams get full, and WHOOPS they have to release the excess water, flooding out people and things in the path.
REPORT: DAMS, FLASH FLOODS & WEATHER MODIFICATION CONNECTIONS
Event: July 2025 Texas Flood Disaster
Dams on the Upper Guadalupe River
Canyon Dam / Canyon Lake
- Type: Rolled-earth flood-control dam with hydroelectric capacity
- Construction: 1958–1964; lake filled to conservation level by 1968
Ingram Dam
- Type: Low-head spillway dam (earth-fill, ~20 ft high)
- Construction date: Not specified, but in place by the 2000s (has monitoring records from at least 2008) gvlakes.com
Kerrville Lake Dam (Center Point Lake Dam)
- Type: Earth dam (~20 ft high)
- Built: 1956
Kerrville Ponding Dam
- Type: Rock/soil dam (~35 ft high) with outlet gates
- Built: 1980
Dams on the Lower Guadalupe River (GBRA-managed Hydroelectric Reservoirs)
(All transferred to GBRA management in 1963; dams built 1928–1932)
Lake McQueeney Dam
- Built: 1927–1928
- Type: Hydroelectric reservoir dam
Lake Placid Dam
Meadow Lake Dam (Lake Nolte)
- Constructed: 1931
- Type: Hydroelectric reservoir dam.
Lake Wood Dam
- Built: 1931
- Type: Hydroelectric reservoir dam.
Lake Gonzales Dam
Lake Dunlap Dam
Additional Historic Dam
Summary Table
| Dam Name | Location | Built | Type |
| Canyon Dam | Above New Braunfels | 1958–1964 | Flood-control rolled-earth |
| Ingram Dam | Near Kerrville | Pre-2000s | Low-head spillway |
| Kerrville Lake Dam | Near Kerrville | 1956 | Earth dam |
| Kerrville Ponding Dam | Near Kerrville | 1980 | Rock/soil with outlet gates |
| Lake McQueeney Dam | West of Seguin | 1927–1928 | Hydroelectric reservoir |
| Lake Placid Dam | Near Seguin | 1928 | Hydroelectric reservoir |
| Meadow Lake Dam (Lake Nolte) | Near Seguin | 1931 | Hydroelectric reservoir |
| Lake Wood Dam | Gonzales County | 1931 | Hydroelectric reservoir |
| Lake Gonzales Dam | Guadalupe County | 1928–1932 | Hydroelectric reservoir |
| Lake Dunlap Dam | Guadalupe County | 1928–1932 | Hydroelectric reservoir |
| Saffold Dam (Seguin) | Seguin | 1853/1938 | Historic mill & hydro dam |
Section 1: Overview – Texas Hill Country Flash Flood
Location: Kerr County, Texas (Hunt to Kerrville, along the Guadalupe River)
Date: July 3–4, 2025
Primary Event:
- A stalled storm system dumped up to 15 inches of rain over the Hill Country in just a few hours.
- The Guadalupe River surged over 20 feet in under 2 hours, cresting at near-record heights of 29 feet at Hunt.
- Flash flood emergency issued by the National Weather Service at ~4:00 a.m. on July 4.
Impact:
- Widespread devastation downstream, especially at summer camps like Camp Mystic.
- At least 78 people dead, including many children; over 40 missing.
Key Point:
This was not a dam collapse, but rather extreme flash flooding triggered by a high-volume rain event.
Section 2: Dams in the Kerrville/Ingram Region
Major Dams Involved or Nearby:
Canyon Dam (Creates Canyon Lake)
Type: Large rolled-earth flood-control dam
Built: 1958–1964 by U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Function: Flood control, water supply, hydroelectricity, recreation
July 2025 Status:
- Lake rose ~10 ft to 888 ft (well below spillway threshold of 909 ft)
- No uncontrolled overflow
- Controlled releases were initiated around July 5–6 to manage lake elevation
- Ingram Dam
Type: Small, low-head, 20-foot earth dam near Kerrville
Status:
Overtopped on July 4 — water flowed over the top due to heavy rainfall
No structural breach
No intentional release — a passive overflow, not a failure
Did contribute to downstream surge
Kerrville Lake Dam (Center Point Lake Dam)
Earth dam, ~20 feet high, built in 1956
For flood control and recreation
Not implicated in failure
Kerrville Ponding Dam
- Small, 35-foot-high rock/soil dam with outlet gates
- Built in 1980
- For irrigation and water supply
Other Dams Downstream (Managed by GBRA)
These are hydroelectric, recreational, and minor flood-control structures:
- Lake Dunlap (failed in 2019, rebuilt by 2023)
- Lake McQueeney
- Lake Placid
- Meadow Lake
Section 3: Dam Performance – Key Timeline & Facts
Canyon Dam (Main Flood Control Dam)
- July 4–5: Lake rose 6–10 ft due to rain; reached 883–888 ft
- July 5–6: Controlled outflow released (~72.6–106 cfs)
- Purpose: Prevent spillover by lowering pressure on the dam
- Result: Helped manage flood risk, did not cause flood
- Last spillway overflow event: July 2002
Ingram Dam (Low-Head Structure)
- July 4, 2025 ~4:00 a.m.: Overtopped due to flash flood surge
- No gates opened; no breach
- Effect: Sudden overflow contributed to surge toward Kerrville and Hunt
Section 4: What Caused the Flood?
Main Cause:
- A stalled storm dumped 10–15 inches of rain in hours
- Upstream creeks and tributaries overflowed into the Guadalupe River
- River levels rose 26–29 ft in a flash flood event, overwhelming all local infrastructure
Not Caused By:
- No dam released water intentionally to cause harm
- Controlled release from Canyon Dam was minor in comparison to rainfall totals
Misconceptions Addressed:
- Social media rumors falsely blamed intentional dam releases
- Authorities confirmed no gates were opened at Ingram
- Canyon Dam functioned as designed, helping prevent even worse damage
Section 5: Summary Verdict on Dams
- Canyon Dam: No breach, no overflow. Released small, controlled outflows. Performed well.
- Ingram Dam: Overtopped due to rain but did not structurally fail.
- Flood Cause: Extreme rainfall, not dam malfunction or manipulation.
Section 6: Global Context – Dam Risks in China
Three Gorges Dam: Major Structural & Environmental Issues
| Risk Category | Details |
| Cracks Detected | 80+ hairline cracks after initial reservoir filling (2003) |
| Seismic Risk | Built near active faults; linked to reservoir-induced earthquakes |
| Landslides & Bank Erosion | 4,600+ landslides in first 11 months after filling |
| Sedimentation | Massive sediment buildup reduces capacity, degrades water quality |
| Ecosystem Decline | Fish migration blocked; several species extinct |
| Social Cost | 1.1–1.4 million displaced; 1,300 archaeological sites submerged |
How It Works with Other Dams:
- Part of a 47-dam coordinated cascade along the Yangtze and tributaries
- Works with: Gezhouba, Xiangjiaba, Baihetan, Wudongde, Xiluodu, etc.
- Joint Strategy: Flood control, hydropower, sediment management, navigation
- 2020 Floods: Reduced peak flows by ~30%, avoiding greater disaster
Section 7: Global Pattern – Dam-Driven Flood Complexity
Observations:
- North Carolina: Recent dam overflow incident
- China: Major dam zone hit by extreme rain
- Texas: Flash flooding near multiple dams
- Excessive rainfall (natural or possibly engineered) fills reservoirs
- When water must be released or overtops spillways, it creates destructive downstream surges
- Dams are both flood-control assets and potential amplifiers of disaster when overwhelmed
Section 8: Weather Modification Patents (Historical)
A long list of official U.S. weather modification patents exists, dating back to the 19th century:
| Year | Patent # | Title |
| 1891 | US462795A | Method of producing rainfall |
| 1920 | US1338343A | Artificial fog/mist production |
| 1946 | US2395827A | Airplane spray unit (U.S. Dept. of Agriculture) |
| 1951 | US2550324A | Process for controlling weather |
| 1952 | US2582678A | Disseminating material from aircraft |
| 1964 | US3126155A | Silver iodide cloud seeding generator |
| 1969 | US3429507A | Rainmaker |
| 2001 | US20030085296A1 | Hurricane and tornado control device |
| …and many more spanning fog dispersal, chemtrails, cloud seeding, and atmospheric manipulation. | | |
Conclusion
- The July 2025 flood in Texas was not caused by dam failure or intentional release, but by record rainfall in a flood-prone region.
- Canyon Dam and Ingram Dam remained intact; the latter was overtopped passively.
- A pattern of extreme rain near dams worldwide (Texas, North Carolina, China) has raised serious questions about how these systems interact with both natural and possibly manipulated weather phenomena.
- The presence of weather modification patents supports further inquiry into whether some rainfall events may be amplified by artificial means.
Weather Modification Patents
YEAR - PATENT NUMBER - PATENT NAME
- 1891 – US462795A – method of producing rainfall
- 1914 – US1103490A – rain maker (balloon images)
- 1917 – US1225521A – protection from poisonous gas in warfare
- 1920 – US1338343A – process and apparatus for the production of intense artificial clouds, fogs, or mists
- 1924 – US1512783A – composition for dispelling fogs
- 1927 – US1619183A – process of producing smoke clouds from moving aircraft
- 1928 – US1665267A – process of producting artificial fogs
- 1932 – US1892132A – atomizing attachment for airplane engine exhausts
- 1933 – US1928963A – electrical system and method (for spraying chemtrails)
- 1934 – US1957075A – airplane spray equipment
- 1936 – US2045865A – skywriting apparatus
- 1936 – US2052626A – method of dispelling fog (mit)
- 1937 – US2068987A – process of dissipating fog
- 1939 – US2160900A – method for vapor clearing
- 1941 – US2232728A – method and composition for dispelling vapors
- 1941 – US2257360A – desensitized pentaerythritol tetranitrate explosive
- 1946 – US2395827A – airplane spray unit (us. dept. of agriculture)
- 1946 – US2409201A – smoke-producing mixture
- 1949 – US2476171A – smoke screen generator
- 1949 – US2480967A – aerial discharge device
- 1950 – US2527230A – method of crystal formation and precipitation
- 1951 – US2550324A – process for controlling weather
- 1951 – US2570867A – method of crystal formation and precipitation (general electric)
- 1952 – US2582678A – material disseminating apparatus for airplanes
- 1952 – US2591988A – production of tio2 pigments (dupont)
- 1952 – US2614083A – metal chloride screening smoke mixture
- 1953 – US2633455A – smoke generator
- 1954 – US2688069A – steam generator
- 1955 – US2721495A – method and apparatus for detecting minute crystal forming particles suspended in a gaseous atmosphere (general electric)
- 1956 – US2730402A – controllable dispersal device
- 1957 – US2801322A – decomposition chamber for monopropellant fuel
- 1958 – US2835530A – process for the condensation of atmospheric humidity and dissolution of fog
- 1959 – US2881335A – generation of electrical fields (haarp – for re-charging clouds!)
- 1959 – US2903188A – control of tropical cyclone formation
- 1959 – US2908442A – method for dispersing natural atmospheric fogs and clouds
- 1960 – US2962450A – fog dispelling composition (see references)
- 1960 – US2963975A – cloud seeding carbon dioxide bullet
- 1961 – US2986360A – aerial insecticide dusting device
- 1962 – US3044911A – propellant system
- 1962 – US3056556A – method of artificially influencing the weather
- 1964 – US3120459A – composite incendiary powder containing metal coated oxidizing salts
- 1964 – US3126155A – silver iodide cloud seeding generator (main commercial ingredient)
- 1964 – US3127107A – generation of ice-nucleating crystals
- 1964 – US3131131A – electrostatic mixing in microbial conversions
- 1965 – US3174150A – self-focusing antenna system (haarp)
- 1966 – US3257801A – pyrotechnic composition comprising solid oxidizer, boron and aluminum additive and binder
- 1966 – US3234357A – electrically heated smoke producing device
- 1966 – US3274035A – metallic composition for production of hydroscopic smoke
- 1967 – US3300721A – means for communication through a layer of ionized gases (haarp)
- 1967 – US3313487A – cloud seeding apparatus
- 1967 – US3338476A – heating device for use with aerosol containers
- 1968 – US3410489A – automatically adjustable airfoil spray system with pump
- 1969 – US3429507A – rainmaker
- 1969 – US3430533A – aircraft dispensor pod having self-sealing ejection tubes
- 1969 – US3432208A – fluidized particle dispenser (us air force)
- 1969 – US3437502A – titanium dioxide pigment coated with silica and aluminum (dupont)
- 1969 – US3441214A – method and apparatus for seeding clouds
- 2001 -US20030085296A1 - Hurricane and tornado control device
