Weather, The New War?

CallmeRaskolnikov
Well, I never said anywhere in my post that HAARP was "sound waves" and I never said anywhere that HAARP "mechanically moves objects."

Your words: "Weather systems are made up of low and high pressure systems. Frequencies can affect these pressures in the atmosphere directly and therefore the weather."

Having said you went to school for audio and sound, you followed it with that line. No, "frequencies" can't affect those pressures at all.

Also: "It's even capable of finding and exploiting resonant frequencies which could be used on areas with fault lines causing earth quakes"

The only sorts of 'resonant frequencies' that could cause an earthquake would be those that can induce some sort of mechanical stress. HAARP can't affect that either.

With the wattage that HAARP is capable is playing with you can use those radio waves to match the resonant frequency of a material. And when a material, any material reaches resonant frequency it vibrates. And if something is vibrating, guess what? It's moving. I'm not saying it's lifting up blocks and building pyramids or some nonsense.

What sort of resonant frequency of a material are you talking about? Molecules can have QM resonances, but these are generally microwave or IR, which gives rise to microwave spectroscopy. But even when you excite a QM resonance in a molecule, the material doesn't vibrate. The molecule can become excited which generally ends up as heat. But it doesn't cause macro-scale vibrations in objects. HAARP doesn't emit IR or microwaves, at any rate. It's limited to 2.7 to 10MHz. You're not going to find "resonant frequencies of a material" in that range.

This is massive electromagnetic energy capable of being focused on a single point.

3.6MW isn't that massive. And the size of the point is about 100km square.

When HAARP pushes a part of the ionosphere up, closer to space, the stratosphere underneath will natural fill that gap, thus manipulating whatever is in that part of the stratosphere underneath.(moisture, water, jet stream even).

Who says it pushes the ionosphere up? Begich? What happens if you heat an uncontained volume of ionosphere? Does it "move up" or just become less dense? Here's a hint - the ionosphere is a good approximation of a vacuum. It doesn't hold the stratosphere in place, that's gravity. The stratosphere doesn't "naturally fill that gap", or it would do so anyway. But at any rate, you heat an uncontained volume of gas, what happens is that it becomes less dense. The pressure doesn't change. Such as it is anyway.

Or even more simply, putting massive amounts of energy out can cause things to heat up. When those radio waves are directed at molecules in the atmosphere it can cause the sub atomic particles within those molecules to move faster which increases their temperature.

Or even more accurately, it accelerates free electrons in the ionosphere, which increases the electron temperature.

This is a military project. Military doesn't invest in projects that don't have a military application, ie potential to be weaponized.

It's a research project. Most of the research is open lit, and is not directed towards military applications. The military interest is in communications generally related to ducting phenomena.

reply to post by Bedlam

You really made a couple of assumptions there in what you thought I was implying using the word sound.


You're right. HAARP is harmless. You've officially debunked it. The government isn't capable of being able to affect and manipulate the weather. That's way to far-fetched...

reply to post by onehuman


S&F. I think your idea, that bad weather could bring the same reconstruction bonuses as war, is sound.

Also, if you can predict bad weather, you can invest in things that will go up during these times like heating during a deep freeze.

Hurricanes are still big money for reconstruction and temporary housing but they are not, according to these articles, any longer big money for oil and gas.

For instance, the 2013 to 2014 Atlantic hurricane season was predicted to be above normal.

NOAA: Atlantic hurricane season on track to be above-normal

August 8, 2013 NOAA issued its updated Atlantic hurricane season outlook today saying the season is shaping up to be above normal with the possibility that it could be very active. The season has already produced four named storms, with the peak of the season – mid-August through October – yet to come.

The usual suspect potential losers within this prediction were gearing up as early as June 2013.

Energy Risk Management in 2013 Hurricane Season

Several years ago, the call for an active hurricane season would have sent natural gas futures skyrocketing as concerns about potentially lost production due to shut-ins or damages to wells in the Gulf of Mexico would have created supply fears, especially if coupled with the expectations of high heat and increased air conditioning load. However, with fracking producing at least 30% of total natural gas production in the U.S. according to the Energy Information Administration (EIA), concerns about lost production due to shut-ins caused by hurricanes have dwindled. Gulf of Mexico offshore oil production accounts for 23% of total U.S. crude oil production and federal offshore natural gas production in the Gulf accounts for 7% of total U.S. dry production.

The jet stream's roller-coaster is tied to both extreme heat and extreme cold.

Extreme weather could be tied to jet stream fluctuations

Dramatic fluctuations in weather have occurred repeatedly in recent years including unrelenting snow in New England and monster tornadoes in Oklahoma. The culprit? Some scientists and forecasters are pointing to abnormal shifts in the jet stream.

In the current case of deep freeze, natural gas prices have gone up because of increased demand.

Natural Gas Market Supplies Tighten on Higher Than Normal Draws

So altering the jet stream can be a money maker for many different sectors. Global warming will alter the jet stream. Raising the ionosphere will also alter it.

reply to post by luxordelphi

Raising the ionosphere will also alter it.

It will? How? The location of the jet stream is determined by conditions in the atmosphere below it. The ionosphere is far, far, above the jet stream.
www.weatherquestions.com...

reply to post by Phage

The location of the jet stream is determined by conditions in the atmosphere below it.

That's not what your link says:

JET STREAMS FORM OVER THE BOUNDARIES BETWEEN AIR MASSES OF DIFFERENT TEMPERATURE

Bernard Eastlund seemed to think that raising the ionosphere could alter the jet stream.

The OMEGA File

"You can virtually lift part of the upper atmosphere," Eastland told OMNI, "You can make it move, do things to it." One of the tricks Eastland envisioned involved 'surgically' distorting the ionosphere to disrupt global communications. Pushing the upper atmosphere around might also generate high-altitude 'drag' that could heat and deflect enemy missiles or surround them with "high-energy electrons" that might cause the missiles to detonate in mid-trajectory. The proposal appealed to the Pentagon, which invested several hundred thousand dollars 'evaluating' Eastland's work. Eastland maintained that there were 'peaceful' uses for his technology. In one scenario, he explained how beams of electromagnetic power could lift portions of the upper atmosphere and redirect the jetstream to alter global weather patterns. Using "plumes of atmospheric particles to act as a lens or focusing device," Eastland proposed redirecting sunlight and heat to different parts of the Earth's surface, making it possible to manipulate wind patterns, cause rainstorms in Ethiopia, drive hurricanes out of the Caribbean, incinerate airborne industrial pollution and sew up the hole in the Antarctic ozone layer. "Because the upper atmosphere is extremely sensitive to small changes in its composition," OMNI cautioned, "merely TESTING an Eastland Device could cause irreversible damage."

reply to post by CallmeRaskolnikov


It is too far fetched if you're talking about a 3.6MW HF transmitter altering the weather.

Its evilness in other ways you'd have to take on a case basis I suppose. If dumping high speed electrons out of the inner Van Allen belts after a CME is evil, there you go.

reply to post by luxordelphi


Except HAARP and Eastlund's proposal are quite different.

reply to post by luxordelphi

That's not what your link says:

Yes it is. The "over the boundaries" part is quite clear. Isn't it? If it's over something that means that "something" which it is talking about is below , right? Or are you saying that the jet stream forms above the ionosphere?

Bernard Eastlund seemed to think that raising the ionosphere could alter the jet stream.

Yeah, well. Bernard was neither a meteorologist nor a climatologist but you do have to include a "usefulness" thing to get a patent. You have to say what you can do with it. The more the merrier, whether or not it can actually do what you say it can. Maybe he had the idea that the jet stream causes weather. It doesn't.

reply to post by Bedlam


Well I guess we disagree then. I believe weather manipulation is possible with 360 million watts. Not to mention there are several other similar facilities in the world some capable of 190 million watts or 1gigawatt in Norway and Russia.

reply to post by CallmeRaskolnikov

I believe weather manipulation is possible with 360 million watts.

I don't know why you beleive that since ionospheric heaters can only affect the ionosphere, which is many 10s of miles above the troposphere where weather occurs. But what installation produces 360 million watts or 190 million watts?

Are you talking about actual power output or ERP? If you're talking about ERP you might be misunderstanding something. It isn't a measure of actual power output.
en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by luxordelphi


Thank you for your reply. I was starting to feel a little lonely out here. I knew there would be two camps of thought on this to say the least.

I agree with you on being able to predict sales as well or being able to control them. Every snowstorm here in New England sends many folks on a mad dash to the grocery store and other kinds of supply stores. Fill the gas tank just in case. I'm sure it is the same all over the north. As you mentioned, the gas bill definitely rises itself. We jumped over $100 above average in one month so far from these storms.

While I appreciate the HAARP arguments , and I realize that is partly my fault for even mentioning it to begin with, could we possibly think about what new direction it may have pointed scientist to get a better control of the weather?

I think the south getting hit unusually hard this year is just more test. They obviously haven't mastered it yet. I also feel since people have been conditioned to hearing about global warming so long, they just automatically write it off as to that is what is causing all this.

reply to post by onehuman

I think the south getting hit unusually hard this year is just more test.

Or is it just more winter...

It does happen in the south also.

reply to post by tsurfer2000h


I am from FLorida origianly and I am quite aware that the south has a winter as well. I am not debating Mother Nature, I am questioning the unusual intensity of it. I also know in the past records have been set naturally, I wasn't born yesterday. I just feel there is more going on than we are aware of.

I do have a question for Phage if he is still following this. If it isn't what HAARP could do,what exactly do you think it would take to move the jet streams around, and do we have that kind of tech.?

For the record anyone else can answer that question as well if you think you have a idea.

Maybe the Countries whom are having the bad weather are moving stuff so not to be seen by sat's, or should I leave the Wackie backie alone

onehuman
reply to post by tsurfer2000h

 

I am from FLorida origianly and I am quite aware that the south has a winter as well. I am not debating Mother Nature, I am questioning the unusual intensity of it. I also know in the past records have been set naturally, I wasn't born yesterday. I just feel there is more going on than we are aware of.

I do have a question for Phage if he is still following this. If it isn't what HAARP could do,what exactly do you think it would take to move the jet streams around, and do we have that kind of tech.?

For the record anyone else can answer that question as well if you think you have a idea.

Yes, this is also my question, its not about global warming, its the weirdness of weather. Its not about HAARP used to manipulate, but the possibility of HAARP side effect.

The weather is going extreme and pretty much weird, what causing it ?
Anyway, HAARP exciting the ionosphere is not something we need, it will save your budget on satellites and provide better and more agile spying/telecommunication/etc, surely lots of advantage, but look at what cost ?.

Once Mother Nature say "you ask for it", we cannot go back.

NullVoid

The weather is going extreme and pretty much weird, what causing it ?

Er, what scientists have been saying for decades?

Okay AGW is not quite as simple as the media tell us, but one of the factors behind reason changes in the Arctic jet stream appears to be Arctic warming, and the consequential decline in the temperature differential between the tropicals and the Arctic (which is in turn the cause of the jet stream in the first place) - and the question then, is why is the Arctic warming when reduced axial tilt means it should be cooling?

That unprecedented increase in atmospheric CO2 we keep hearing about, coupled with black carbon, brown clouds, urbanisation, ozone depletion and mass tropical deforestation couldn't possibly have any effect on the climate. Could it?

NullVoid
Anyway, HAARP exciting the ionosphere is not something we need...

You realize the Sun does this to a much greater extent every day, right? That's why the ionosphere exists.

reply to post by onehuman


en.wikipedia.org...

The above may be of help

Bedlam

NullVoid
Anyway, HAARP exciting the ionosphere is not something we need...

You realize the Sun does this to a much greater extent every day, right? That's why the ionosphere exists.

Yes, and I also know that HAARP scientist also love to see solar flares and I also know they are "inspecting" it. The ionosphere is pretty cool to be a gadget medium isnt it ?

Yes Sun effect is greater, but why the need to poke a hole from inside ? IF the atmosphere there cannot absorb the energy sent, we can expect some pretty stuff. Weakening the magnetosphere, heat a hole in ionosphere, probe into mesosphere and add some solar flare. Kazaam, we all gonna be toasted under beautiful aurora.

Btw, I'm waiting of news where planes happen to cross the HAARP ray path while its in operation, no need box cutter at all to bring down an aeroplane. Bonus! No weapon in sight.

reply to post by NullVoid


How does heating a small portion of the ionosphere "poke a hole" in it?
What "atmosphere there?" The ionosphere is, for all intents and purposes, space.

HAARP does not weaken the magnetosphere. It does heat (not make a hole in) a small region of the ionosphere. Since the mesophere is not ionized, HAARP has no effect on it.

HAARP does not transmit a ray. It transmits a widening beam. Its power density is not great enough to damage an aircraft.