Gakona HAARP on Full Power during Earthquake in Haiti!

Although ionospheric heating could potentially produce some dangerous scenarios, i do not think it can cause earthquakes.
Join a physics forum and discuss the potentials of EM waves to get some educated answers.
Low frequency AUDIO waves that can cause physical vibrations in a substrate are not the same type of waves as what HAARP produces.
These types of waves can heat or reflect, but the amount of heat or reflect is nothing compared to the heat and pressures already present at tectonic danger zones.

reply to post by EvolvedMinistry


I must say this thread has evolved into a very tense place. However EM I do have some questions I would like to ask. Your opinion really, because you present yourself as very knowledgable on the subjects at hand. These are just clarification points for my own sake.

-If the evidence/data is "right out there" for everyone to see that Haarp and its kin are WMDs, why is the whole topic considered conspiracy/fringe? the truth of the data should be considered self evident, no?

-What is it about the data that causes the conflicting views? 2+2=4, yes?

-If Haarp and its kin are WMDs as your point of view would seem to suggest, what are you doing to prevent their proliferation? I know that if I honestly believed my country was killing thousands of people in this cowardly way and I had the data to back it up I would be screaming, begging, pleading with anyone who would listen to do something about it.

-Is there any data that would get you to change your mind? What would it have to show?

-Have you considered working at any of these facilities? Your knowledge and grasp of the mechanics seem strong enough to rank you as an expert. Why not apply? couldn't hurt and you would get see first hand what was going on.

If you have answered any of these questions already I apologize.


Thank you in advance for your answers.

[edit on 28-1-2010 by Helmkat]

reply to post by Helmkat


You most likely missed the info that says that William Cohen indorsed the fact that someone had engaged in electromagnetic earthquake equipment and more.
Just look ALL OVER THE THREAD.

Originally posted by Donny 4 million
William Cohen indorsed the fact that someone had engaged in electromagnetic earthquake equipment and more.

unfortunately he never said that at all, care to show where he said that?

Originally posted by dereks

Originally posted by Donny 4 million
William Cohen indorsed the fact that someone had engaged in electromagnetic earthquake equipment and more.

unfortunately he never said that at all, care to show where he said that?

There is a dozen of sources posted by other ATSers right here, on this thread, that Show the "official" statement of Mr. William Cohen about HAARP/Eartquake.

Why don't you read and search by yourself?

reply to post by Donny 4 million


Again, for the thousandth time, he never said that. He said some people were claiming to be researching being able to do that, no that they actually were. Please stop trying to deceive people, it's not nice.

reply to post by Imagir


Because he didn't actually say that. It seems most people who believe HAARP is a weapon simply jumped to the part where he says "earthquakes", and skipped the rest where he describes these being claims of research, not actual working weapons.

Originally posted by dereks

Originally posted by Donny 4 million
William Cohen indorsed the fact that someone had engaged in electromagnetic earthquake equipment and more.

unfortunately he never said that at all, care to show where he said that?

Sure see post by Imagir above he has payed real good attention to this thread. When you find the reality of his exact words bring them right back here and I will hold your hand and we'll have a nice little chat about it. Fetch me the quote you disagree with.

reply to post by Donny 4 million


You keep missing the rest of that same transcript where it clearly states, in plain English, that he's not talking about actual weapons, but about claimed research. Please, stop trying to deceive everyone. I know this is one of your pet hypotheses, but that is being intellectually dishonest.

Originally posted by davesidious
reply to post by Donny 4 million

 

You keep missing the rest of that same transcript where it clearly states, in plain English, that he's not talking about actual weapons, but about claimed research. Please, stop trying to deceive everyone. I know this is one of your pet hypotheses, but that is being intellectually dishonest.

Intellectual how very thoughtful !
Ah, well now let's see the way it works here is I post the truth about HAARP.
Then if you are ill equipped to comprehend YOU fetch me a quote of my truth and present it to me Donny. It is expected that the QUOTE contain the exact words--- I Donny type and also the exact words of the QUOTED source. That be Mr. Cohen in this case. If you fail in your fetch assignment. Come on back and we will perfect this by practice. Hurry now.

Click here for more information.

Originally posted by Donny 4 million
reply to post by Helmkat

 

Here is a good read for you.
Here on ATS

By Zorgon
Every One Speaks about HAARP, but did you know...


This will be way less taxing on you than doing any work at all on your own.
Oh ! it's a thread I know how confusing this must be for you.

[edit on 28-1-2010 by Donny 4 million]

[edit on 28-1-2010 by Donny 4 million]

I apologize D4M, I asked someone else for their opinion.

Here is the deal.

I have read the posts.

I have read the quotes.

I have read other sources.

I like Zorgons work and he is on my "friends" list for his work.

However that this thread is still going says that something is wrong somewhere. Something in the evidence "Pro WMD" is not adding up. So I asked someone who seemed to have a strong grasp of the subject matter some questions I felt were important me and while this thread is not about "me" it is a public forum and I can ask any question(s) I choose and I should imagine there are others who would like to see those questions answered directly instead of berated and shuffled off to other threads.

Thanks


[edit on 28-1-2010 by Helmkat]

reply to post by Donny 4 million


The quote has been posted here thousands of times. You keep repeating it. It's the transcript you often refer to.

The document is here, and the quote in particular is as follows:

Well, it points out the nature of the threat. It turned out to be a false threat under the circumstances. But as we've learned in the intelligence community, we had something called -- and we have James Woolsey here to perhaps even address this question about phantom moles. The mere fear that there is a mole within an agency can set off a chain reaction and a hunt for that particular mole which can paralyze the agency for weeks and months and years even, in a search. The same thing is true about just the false scare of a threat of using some kind of a chemical weapon or a biological one. There are some reports, for example, that some countries have been trying to construct something like an Ebola Virus, and that would be a very dangerous phenomenon, to say the least. Alvin Toeffler has written about this in terms of some scientists in their laboratories trying to devise certain types of pathogens that would be ethnic specific so that they could just eliminate certain ethnic groups and races; and others are designing some sort of engineering, some sort of insects that can destroy specific crops. Others are engaging even in an eco- type of terrorism whereby they can alter the climate, set off earthquakes, volcanoes remotely through the use of electromagnetic waves. So there are plenty of ingenious minds out there that are at work finding ways in which they can wreak terror upon other nations. It's real, and that's the reason why we have to intensify our efforts, and that's why this is so important.

You can see from the highlighted areas (except the last one) that he is referring to reports of research, not actual weapons. It's only his very last sentence where his words get muddy. If your entire argument rests, which it appears to do, on some clumsy words in a transcript from a verbal interview with William Cohen, then may I suggest that you try to find some other corroborating evidence. As surely, if he was not talking about hypothetical research (as the entire paragraph seems to claim), then there must be more evidence. "Look! William Cohen said, while listing off various claimed, unsubstantiated research projects, that some folks are causing eco-terrorism, therefore HAARP must be that weapon" is not a claim.

Even if he was talking about these things existing, which is dubious, he did not say "HAARP is one such weapon". You still have no actual evidence that HAARP is anything other than it says it is, even if William Cohen was actually saying these weapons exist.

You, so far, have no case at all. Also, you didn't tell me how you can believe one claim from the government, but then ignore other claims the government makes as false. Either William Cohen is telling the truth, in which case so is the HAARP website and all the government's press on it, or they are both liars. To believe one and not the other would require further evidence, which I'll gladly wait for.

reply to post by davesidious

Your argument is getting lost in your inability to separate the first part of the paragraph for the last part.

He was absolutely crystal clear when talking about the weapons verses the information regarding Moles or the ebola virus. He specifically stated that the threat of electromagnetic weaponry was "real" and dictated that measures needed to be taken to prevent it. End of story. You can try to confuse the situation all you like, and I assume you'll continue this endeavor until it drives you absolutely insane. Doesn't matter...Cohen said it, and its right there in black and white.

Now, coupled with all of the rest of the evidence that I posted, it is enough to suffice the people who choose to educate themselves on it. You're not going to change any views here, as we will not change yours. And since you cannot provide any contradictory, scientifically sound evidence that refutes this information, we have no need to alter our perspective. But, it would behoove you to at least read the information that has been posted concerning HAARP so at least you can be educated for a "just in case" scenario.

Thanks again Dave...you've been great.


[edit on 28-1-2010 by EvolvedMinistry]

Now, coupled with all of the rest of the evidence that I posted, it is enough to suffice the people who choose to educate themselves on it.

reply to post by EvolvedMinistry


Care to answer my questions EM? I would really like to see your words in reply.

Why? because your implication is that the information you have kindly provided is enough unto itself that anyone who "educates" themselves with it clearly will see the truth of the matter. However we all know truth is a many edged sword.

So again

Why if the data is a plain as the nose on our faces are the educated still not buying the WMD data?

Since you know the data to be true are you doing anything about the proliferation of these weapons?

Since you have such a strong grasp of the subject have you thought about trying to get hired at a Haarp facility?

thanks

**** ATTENTION ****

DO NOT POST ABOUT OTHER MEMBERS

YOU WILL BE POST BANNED.

reply to post by Helmkat


Well, the first question was more or less a statement, so, I'll answer that to the best of my ability.
Here's my answer: Whatever "Truth" you choose to entertain is not up to me. I presented evidence that could serve to help you formulate a more well rounded hypothesis of your own concerning the capabilities of electromagnetic weapons and the features of HAARP technologies. Without all of the speculative information, it is hard to formulate an accurate opinion based solely off of the surface of mainstream information. If there was no one presenting a counter side to mainstream information, then atrocities like the Tuskegee Experiments and MKULTRA would have never been discovered. There needs to be balance, and consequently, you should question the motives of the people who are desperately seeking to prove me and other members on this board wrong. In the end, what do they have vested in disproving just another "whack job" conspiracy theory?

Here's the second part to the 1st question:
I didn't claim that HAARP was the culprit behind the Haiti quake, I merely spoke of its power potential and the possible side effects that this technology can create if directed in such a manner to forge it into a weapon. I just wanted to get that out of the way. There's no way for me to prove that this quake was a result of HAARP tech.

Question #2
One of the best ways that a weapon can be hidden is..."in plain sight." Now, I would personally believe that HAARP was merely a means of scientific study and experimentation of the ionosphere if it were not for the fact that the U.S. Navy and Air force were responsible for its construction. It's the military for God's sake. They are KNOWN PRIMARILY for creating weaponry. HAARP is an atmospheric heater that uses electromagnetic radiation (microwave technology) to interact with the ionosphere which receives its power from the sun. That is fact. Have you ever seen what a microwave oven can do to your food if you leave it in too long??? If one were to direct this energy haphazardly it could create serious problems within our atmosphere, and it does not take an engineer to illuminate this fact.

Question #3
I am doing precisely what I am doing. Which is spreading information that may help others come to a solid conclusion of their own. I am doing my best to educate the public with the knowledge that I have come across in my years of studying this. So, if anything, I'm trying my best to prevent the proliferation of electromagnetic weaponry.

Question #4
No, I don't think I would consider working for any such company for a variety of reasons. The most important reason would be because I am against the use of such devices if they are for the harm of mankind. However, I cannot prove that HAARP has ever caused damage to anyone. But, the implications are quite large that HAARP could be quite detrimental to the world if used for dubious purposes.

By the way, I apologize for not seeing your first post. I was out for a little while. Thank you for asking a good question. I hope that response suffices.


[edit on 29-1-2010 by EvolvedMinistry]

reply to post by EvolvedMinistry


OK, I don't have to, but I'll give you that. You still haven't demonstrated that HAARP is one such weapon. You have yet to show any evidence.

Even though anyone (with a background in science, anyway) reading that quote will know that he wasn't seriously suggesting Lex Luthor-type villains were causing earthquakes with electromagnetic energy

reply to post by EvolvedMinistry


Aaah - there's your evidence: Speculation & conjecture. Brilliant. Another fantastic demonstration of someone not understanding something, adding 2 + 2 and getting eleventy-point-five million. Fantastic.

reply to post by EvolvedMinistry


EM, thank you for taking the time to answer my questions. They did help me to understand where you are coming from and that is what I needed to know

Sometimes when a thread gets to long and to heated the conversations become very polarized. So while I might not agree with all that you are saying, I can appreciate your point of view.

[edit on 29-1-2010 by Helmkat]