It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
You're misunderstanding what the word fiction means in the context the Air Force officers are using it here though, and the technology, methods or feasibility of what is talked about isn't part of the fiction. That is also very specifically laid out a bit further into the report.
fic·tion noun \ˈfik-shən\
: written stories about people and events that are not real : literature that tells stories which are imagined by the writer
: something that is not true
It's not chatting at all. It's defending attacks...and that shouldn't BE something any member at ATS has to do for mere opinions of a controversial topic.
originally posted by: Wrabbit2000
a reply to: network dude
I'm not that sure about how much man did or didn't do in damage to the ionosphere. Some objective research at some point would be good to see, but that will require an open disclosure of what all was done while experimenting with HAARP. How much from the Russian system and what were it's power levels?
The head of the Geo institute in Alaska, in comments on HAARP, plainly described what they were doing in at least part of it but just assured the interviewer that the impact was very very small for area.
originally posted by: gnarkill1529
a reply to: tsurfer2000h
Have you ever participated in a military exercise? They use fictional situations for training purposes all the time...its the norm. Now this may be hard for you to understand but they use those Fictional situations because they want you to be accustomed to that scenario when it arises. Doesn't mean it will arise but its better to be safe than sorry.
just saying its fiction isnt enough for me to dismiss the report as something that wont be looked at by the military. As I know the military uses fictional situations all the time.
Have you ever participated in a military exercise? They use fictional situations for training purposes all the time...its the norm.
Now this may be hard for you to understand but they use those Fictional situations because they want you to be accustomed to that scenario when it arises. Doesn't mean it will arise but its better to be safe than sorry.
This report contains fictional representations of future situations/scenarios. Any similarities to real people or
events, other than those specifically cited, are unintentional and are for purposes of illustration only
Edit: granted I don't have time to read the whole report right now so I could be completely off...hopefully later today and get read some into this
Disclaimer
2025 is a study designed to comply with a directive from the chief of staff of the Air Force to examine the
concepts, capabilities, and technologies the United States will require to remain the dominant air and space
force in the future. Presented on 17 June 1996, this report was produced in the Department of Defense school
environment of academic freedom and in the interest of advancing concepts related to national defense. The
views expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not reflect the official policy or position of the
United States Air Force, Department of Defense, or the United States government.
This report contains fictional representations of future situations/scenarios. Any similarities to real people or
events, other than those specifically cited, are unintentional and are for purposes of illustration only.
This publication has been reviewed by security and policy review authorities, is unclassified, and is cleared
for public release.
I don't see why the same logic cant be applied in the case of this report.
But seriously, take a look at the whole paper, the beginning especially.
where it says this:
Ill check out the stated link before making anymore comment about whats in it
originally posted by: gnarkill1529
a reply to: tsurfer2000h
Well In my mind the fictional situations are used in practice for actual similar situations. I have admittedly not read the report and I hope to get into it today but normally, in my experience with the military, fictional situations are used in training to simulate actual situations. I don't see why the same logic cant be applied in the case of this report.
And im not saying anything in the report that is referred to as exotic weather warfare technology is real so don't get the idea that I believe it is, but I do think it is possible that our military is actively studying weather warfare maybe in an attempt to control it someday.