SCI/TECH: Volcanos Acting Up

Scanning my usual cam-sites,

Mt. Erebus in Antarctica -- www.ees.nmt.edu...

Mt. Etna --
www.camcentral.com...

www.albanetcom.com...

are both kicking up a lot of ash today. Yellowstone is impossible to gauge; their webcams provide views of only developed Park areas. Popo's site is down.

There are many things that could produce the odd "circles" in the radar images which shouldn't be alarming... explosions, nuclear reactor leaks, or high-powered ground-based radar instruments. These aren't explosions judging by their time length. They aren't nuclear leaks because they aren't by any reactors (that I know of). What is interesting is that the maps show the power concentrated at the *outside* edges mostly, not in the center which contradicts the inverse square law of how rays of energy propagate and disperse over distance.. So it could be a satellite imaging goof, image processing software malfunction, or something else, but the pattern, duration, and intensity is not indicative of a weather disturbance without corroborating information from the ground to show that it is indeed measuring a disturbance in the weather and not conflicting data caused by outside sources of radar. The real weather keeps moving the way it was before the circles appear throughout the presence of the circle, and afterwards indicating to me that the satellite is definitely not picking up its own radar reflected, but rather it's seeing another uniform source of verticle or spherical radar emitted from something on the ground which has nothing to do with generating or influencing the weather there.

Satellite radar works by measuring and comparing timing of radar it sends out as it is either absorbed or reflected by moisture (clouds) in the atmosphere and from the ground. Therefore any significant verticle radiation of similar frequency-band signals from the ground will distort accurate weather imaging from space as it messes with the satellite imaging sensors and software's ability to guage its own radar being returned with extraneous signals which distract accurate assessment of its own. Significant not meaning cops looking for speaders, that is far too weak to penetrate the atmostphere and be picked up on satellite. I mean airspace-surveilance strength. Governmental (NASA or Military likely) but doubtfull in any malicious intent, likely part of a defense project.

Here is one image which is at odds with the others which makes my point clear. It stands out because the disturbance doesn't disappear abruptly or fade out quickly and the edge of its influence in the image is not perfectly circular, ring-like and defined like the other images. The other images look more like something merged in by Photoshop or bad data from imaging sensor failure because the disturbances are too perfectly defined and consistent in area of influence to be evidence of any signals propagating through the atmosphere.. As temperature variations, time of day-related atmospheric particle layer shifts, wind, and hydrological atmospheric conditions are in constant flux and will always unevenly distort any signals distance and path of travel and velocity over a period of time. Any licensed amateur radio people like me out there will be nodding their heads in agreement on that one. That means this image if any is more credible than the others of some 'force' creating a stagnant weather system over a particular area because it's not so perfectly defined. Its visual properties (except that its relatively stationary) are much more consistent with a real weather system's in that it's more analog/soupy/diffused/organic in consistency, less digital/solid/ray-like/inorganic than the other images.

www.cheniere.org...

Note the radar disturbance is relatively stable while the normal weather system moves through apparently unaffected by the disturbance. If the relatively-stationary disturbance was actually depicting creation of an artificially enforced weather system over that area, the regular clouds would not have simply passed through like they always do unaffected. They would have disappeared upon contact, or mitigated and/or antagonized part of the disturbance in some way.. But clearly in this pic, the weather looks completely oblivious/unaffected by the disturbance imaged.

The one image mentioned previously that shows one big disturbance and then a whole lot of small ones clustered elsewhere immediately following still doesn't prove any correlation to actual weather either.. The only thing it proves is there were many other similar smaller-scale disturbances clustered in another area shortly after, or there is some real wacked out satellite with fairly unreliable sensor data spewing out. The real weather is apparent and obvious looking at the map and easily distinguished. It is slow-moving, non-geometric (unshapely, scattered, apaternistic), and constant in velocity, slow to change in direction or break-up (occurs over hours, not minutes). Any other type of behavior not consistent with that would be definitely noticed on the ground and documented visually somewhere.

My own experience I could only report one time seeing in all my years (and recently) a cloud (or what looked like one) that was neither normal appearance nor moving.. and that was a dark-grey (almost black), squarish-shaped, low-hanging but thin (thicker than stratospheric but nowhere in the territory of cumulous) cloud (visually roughly estimated by me to be perhaps a quarter mile to half mile in width) which hung in the same place over one peak of the San Bernardino Mountains near Devore (I-15 and SR30) in Southern California for over 4 hours before disappearing suddenly. It was nothing nearly as large as the distrubances seen in those radar images. That's not the only nature-contradicting thing I've seen in those mountains, but it is the only weather-related item of note.. unless temporary unexplained slow-moving patches of odd uniformly 10-inch vertical wave distortions in broad sunny-cloudless wind-less daylight on a shallow natural river near along route 66 are somehow related to some weather-related. (Yes, I and my boyfriend at the time both saw it at the same time and have the same recollection of it then and since so I'm not off my rocker K?) My theory on that one? The mountains in California are somewhat equistant from the Florida Keys and Alaska where the miltary has two deep-water extra-low-frequency sonar arrays for sending messages to its submarine fleet. Perhaps these very low frequency (meaning large size slow-velocity) waves cross-cancel and create seemingly random ground-based disturbances to fluids (even moving ones) at ground level. The disturbance was observed shortly before the war began in Iraq. The ELF system would definitely have been ablaze at that point in time. Seen any confused whales anyone?

Back directly on topic. It's likely that most if not all of the circular satellite radar disturbances may be new radar systems being tested by the US military or aerospace agencies for newer more advanced pulsed and continuous emission radar airspace-intrusion and flying object detection systems. Nothing to become "Chicken Little" over people. Clearly people in and visually adjacent to those areas on the map where the disturbance image shows on satellite radar would have said something about unusual weather out of nowhere in strange patterns that are clearly unnatural if that had ever occurred.

Final word: As a provable fact, rain DECREASES the chances of having an earthquake.. Read the early-warning prediction system that was developed for Parkfield by USGS and it will confirm that fact.. Predictions were DOWNGRADED whenever rain occurred because it loosens the ground, making it more likely to smoothly slide and stretch than to "snap" like a bent branch let go of. That's fairly logical.. so no government devices can "cause" earthquakes by altering weather unless they can force long periods of no rain at all in a prone area.. which is clearly not what the disturbances shown do.

Supporting info:
About smooth versus locked land movements.
Parkfield result data created this prediction scheme. Weather included.

Bonus material.
Q: Where is the sky going to fall next? No, really..!
A: Likely [link
here, where it has before and looks like it wants to again..
What does an alert level 2 means exactly.

Hhmmm.


In retrospect - looks like emily might have been on to something here. ...Anyone think the massive underground earthquake that caused the Asian tsunami may have been related to the trends emily was describing? Like, they were a warning?


.