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.

 

Conspiracy Theorists Vindicated: HAARP Confirmed Weather-manipulation Tool

page: 12
103
<< 9  10  11    13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 20 2014 @ 02:09 AM
link   
a reply to: JiggyPotamus

Do you really think they would give it up? If it isn't dismantled, replaced by some more compact version, most likely, then it will be "sold" to some government-run front company.

They admit it now because too many people know, and denying it isn't feasible any longer. Plus, the admission will make people read about it and move on, assuming the story is over. Human nature.

That the United States and Russia agreed not to use weather modification against one another speaks volumes about how much control they really have.




posted on May, 20 2014 @ 02:10 AM
link   
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes




They agreed not to use it against other nations. That doesn't say they won't use it here, to manipulate this one. Plus, such agreements are often broken.



SO they agreed to not use something in 1978 that wasn't built until many years later, then decide to use this as a weapon to control weather?



posted on May, 20 2014 @ 02:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: tsurfer2000h
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes




They agreed not to use it against other nations. That doesn't say they won't use it here, to manipulate this one. Plus, such agreements are often broken.



SO they agreed to not use something in 1978 that wasn't built until many years later, then decide to use this as a weapon to control weather?




And then pretend to dismantle it even though you can drive to the site.



posted on May, 20 2014 @ 02:14 AM
link   
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes




They admit it now because too many people know, and denying it isn't feasible any longer.


When and where exactly did they admit this?



posted on May, 20 2014 @ 02:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes
a reply to: snarky412

They agreed not to use it against other nations. That doesn't say they won't use it here, to manipulate this one. Plus, such agreements are often broken.

In any case, that proves they CAN do such things, because they wouldn't sign an agreement not to if they weren't able.


Even other countries suspect the US of 'dirty deeds'

From the EQ in Haiti to the tsunami to the Japan EQ.....
But, of course, our government would never do any such a thing [/sarcasm]



posted on May, 20 2014 @ 02:30 AM
link   
a reply to: snarky412

I heard that the US dropped the meteor on Russia last year too.
For practice.


edit on 5/20/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2014 @ 03:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: snarky412

I heard that the US dropped the meteor on Russia last year too.
For practice.



Hiya Phage....
You doing alright tonight?



Yeah, I heard they used a sling shot!!!!
Dang those rumors...LOL


edit on 20-5-2014 by snarky412 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2014 @ 04:21 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Shooting energy into the atmosphere and controlling it.......that layer does affect the weather, as has been pointed out in the thread already. Add in the agreement between the US and Russia not to use weather control against one another, and it's more certain.



posted on May, 20 2014 @ 04:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
Yes. They can do cloud seeding. But the treaty says they can't use it as a weapon.


Do you really think that's all they can do these days? They can cause earthquakes. Known technology. Weather manipulation isn't unlikely at all.



posted on May, 20 2014 @ 04:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: tsurfer2000h
SO they agreed to not use something in 1978 that wasn't built until many years later, then decide to use this as a weapon to control weather?


We don't know what they agreed not to use then. technology does advance, and it's a guarantee that the government doesn't reveal everything they can do. Any technology that is useful as a weapon or for defense will be concealed. If they are talking of HAARP being obsolete now, you can bet they have something a lot more powerful. That's the way these things work. Test aircraft are a good example of this.



posted on May, 20 2014 @ 04:26 AM
link   
a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Watch the video. The explanation is there, and that it would work for weather modification is explained in the thread already. I see no need to repeat that.



posted on May, 20 2014 @ 04:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: snarky412
Even other countries suspect the US of 'dirty deeds'

From the EQ in Haiti to the tsunami to the Japan EQ.....
But, of course, our government would never do any such a thing [/sarcasm]


Of course they wouldn't! (now I need a towel to mop up the oozing sarcasm)

I don't blame them for being suspicious. Earthquakes can be caused, and weather control isn't farfetched at all, at least on a small scale. Computers can track a lot of the variables.



posted on May, 20 2014 @ 08:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sump3
I also wonder when they are gonna announce that the sun is simply getting to hot and that there's nothing they can do about it.

That's my guess for their deception of global warming, HAARP and if true, chemtrails.


A unique perspective-- looking at things from outside the box.

Obviously an unfettered mind.



posted on May, 20 2014 @ 08:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: snarky412

I heard that the US dropped the meteor on Russia last year too.
For practice.


Dude, Stop starting Genres, lol.



posted on May, 20 2014 @ 09:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes

originally posted by: snarky412
Even other countries suspect the US of 'dirty deeds'

From the EQ in Haiti to the tsunami to the Japan EQ.....
But, of course, our government would never do any such a thing [/sarcasm]


Of course they wouldn't! (now I need a towel to mop up the oozing sarcasm)

I don't blame them for being suspicious. Earthquakes can be caused, and weather control isn't farfetched at all, at least on a small scale. Computers can track a lot of the variables.


Earthquakes can be caused? Got ANY evidence for that? And don't just Google "earthquakes + ionosphere" and post links to the same paper we've already seen, because that's not what it means.

As for computers controlling the weather? Computers still can't even PREDICT the weather reliably past about five days out, let alone control it.



posted on May, 20 2014 @ 09:32 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

While I don't necessarily think HAARP controls the weather, it may play a part in the overall system of controlling the weather the government wants by 2025. Whether this is in the troposphere or all the way up to the lower levels of the ionosphere.

I don't pretend to be an expert on HAARP, but I don't think anyone on this forum should pretend that they are either. There could be hidden capabilities of HAARP(not necessarily weather related) that have sinister implications.

Whenever the government takes over control of a certain technology for military purposes it should be a red flag.



posted on May, 20 2014 @ 11:47 AM
link   
a reply to: Euphem



I don't pretend to be an expert on HAARP, but I don't think anyone on this forum should pretend that they are either.

One doesn't have to be an expert on HAARP to understand the basic physics behind it. And the weather.
The two don't mix.

edit on 5/20/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2014 @ 02:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

What interference are you talking about? Look at a phased array radar. How far apart are the elements?


HAARP is not always RADAR. RAdio Detection And Ranging is a detection machine. HAARP can be a detector but it's function is energy insertion.

The EM waves emitted from a phased array are not designed to intersect, the emissions keep a relative position to each other to infinity.

One diagram for HAARP shows the signals from the 180 antennas intersecting at a single point, the target. Since all EMR moves at the same speed, the antennas must emit at different times, farthest to closest, in order to arrive at the same time.

Maybe the signals varied on a harmonic in the 1000th or 10,000 decimal place to prevent too much destructive interference.

Maybe there was a pulse technique that isolated the different emissions.



posted on May, 20 2014 @ 02:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Semicollegiate

HAARP can be a detector but it's function is energy insertion.
The HAARP ionospheric heater is not a "detector" (the correct term is receiver) ever. It is a transmitter. Always.
Radar is a combination of transmitter and receiver. A phased array radar system includes a phased array transmitter.


The EM waves emitted from a phased array are not designed to intersect, the emissions keep a relative position to each other to infinity.
False, and impossible. Even a laser doesn't do that.



One diagram for HAARP shows the signals from the 180 antennas intersecting at a single point, the target.
Then that diagram is erroneous or overly simplified. Each HAARP antenna is a dipole. Dipole antennas are not directional, they produce a toroidal radiation pattern, their signals cannot be made to intersect at a single point.

This is an accurate representation of the emissions from a phased array. Notice how it is the interference patterns which produce a directional signal by adjusting the phasing of each antenna. Notice that the beam spreads. Notice that the power of the beam decreases with distance.

www.met.reading.ac.uk...


Since all EMR moves at the same speed, the antennas must emit at different times, farthest to closest, in order to arrive at the same time.
No. The antennas are a few meters apart. The signal travels at the speed of light. Unless the signal is an absurdly short pulse (it isn't) difference is not relevant.


Maybe the signals varied on a harmonic in the 1000th or 10,000 decimal place to prevent too much destructive interference.
No. As I said, phase shifting is used to control vary the interference patterns.


Maybe there was a pulse technique that isolated the different emissions.
Signal modulation (AM and FM) is used and continuous as well as pulsed transmissions are used, depending on the particular experiment. Both none of that has to do with the aiming or power of the beam. There is no need to speculate about it, it's quite well explained in the many, many published papers which are readily available.

edit on 5/20/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2014 @ 02:49 PM
link   
I live near 1 of the play grounds!!! I a reply to: snarky412







 
103
<< 9  10  11    13  14 >>

log in

join