It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable 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: 14
<< 11  12  13   >>

log in


posted on May, 21 2014 @ 01:27 AM
Phage can be brutal and to the point, but I think that' a bit unfair.

originally posted by: lotusfoot
a reply to: Phage
Phage, you have trolled every comment on this topic for a while now .

Physics is a subject close to his heart, and expertise. I appreciate and value his input as I he leads me to kernels of knowledge. I grow from it, and think we all should. I learn from questioning, testing, and practicing, as most do, including questioning him as long as you learn something from it..

Or is it your destiny to make sure everyone shares what you read from the particular website you read it from about HAARP ? Because Im not impressed that you can find fault with everything people say.

That may be due to the lack of para-language that the internet cannot provide. For instance, when I see him making blatant typos I get the impression he's "perturbed" by the author's input (ie-he's pissed).
If you consider the amount of discrete sources, thought, and time that he's put into his responses to posters (who aren't redundant) I think you could consider him quite enlightening. That doesn't mean you have to agree with him all the time and that it makes you adversaries.

As the saying goes in logic, attack the argument, not the arguer. And be intellectually honest and open.

posted on May, 21 2014 @ 08:05 AM

originally posted by: lotusfoot
a reply to: Phage
Phage, you have trolled every comment on this topic for a while now.

Correcting fundamental misconceptions about HAARP is not trolling.

The OP posting a thread claiming that weather manipulation has been "confirmed", when it clearly hasn't and couldn't be, might be considered trolling.

posted on May, 21 2014 @ 08:20 AM
This is ridiculous, before people get excited because the ionosphere is part of the atmosphere and completely misunderstand what is meant by this why don't they research? Research, research research???

It makes me increasingly sad to see how many people subscribe to ideas that they have no understanding over. The saddest thing is that the information to enable you to come to your own conclusions is readily available and verifiable.

It reminds me of the US and increasingly UK (and probably other countries) consumer attitude - it's gone beyond 'I really want this because it does this' to 'I really want this.....' and people buy stuff they don't even understand the function of!
In the same way, people are increasingly subscribing to ideas because it's different or sounds cool - but don't understand the fundamental principles involved or why they should (or usually shouldn't) share the opinion!

It seems that the only thing that matters now is proving that any organisation or individual that holds any power is lying and wrong, even if sometimes they are not. Sometimes the truth is ... the truth... While there are forces at work these days which are clearly becoming more corrupt, please please don't destroy years and years of progress and knowledge in trying to out the demons so to speak. Which is what seems to be happening.

posted on May, 21 2014 @ 09:05 AM
a reply to: Phage

HAARP need not use a beam mode. HAARP is not scanning 360 degrees of area every 100 milliseconds looking for bogeys. HAARP is sending energy across a predetermined distance at a chosen time.

An interference pattern might or might not aid in the amount of energy that reaches the target. Generally, one would assume that the benefit of controlling a beam would come at the cost of wasted energy. The antennas put out the same amount of energy either way, with interference or without it.

By timing the transmission from each antenna, all of the power of the grid could be brought to bear over a short time interval. Each antenna or combination of antennas initiating and terminating transmission sequentially, separated by nanoseconds, controlled by computer program, to the end of maximum energy at some point (small volume)-- not making a beam.

Interference would be problem when the transmissions overlapped in time. Perhaps the time interval could be tweaked to match the idiosyncrasies of the equipment.

Presumably and actually, a saturation level is reached when putting energy into a specific spot on the ionosphere, which limits the amount of energy that can be reflected from that point. Spreading the energy out over "parallel" or converging on the target lines, into multiple paths, would enable some larger quantity of energy to be reflected. Especially if the ionosphere could be shaped in some way, into a vaguely ovoid or perhaps parabolic surface. Different wavelengths, chosen for their appropriate angles of reflection could be selected to match the surface of the ionosphere, and spread out the energy load.

I guess the dipole antenna was selected because it is innocuous and the ionosphere was assumed to be delicate. Insurance against ionospheric damage.

A HAARP type layout with directional antennas reflected off of a satellite could be spectacular.

On the other hand, the dipole might have something to do with the natural resonance of the Earths magnetic field.

edit on 21-5-2014 by Semicollegiate because: (no reason given)

edit on 21-5-2014 by Semicollegiate because: (no reason given)

edit on 21-5-2014 by Semicollegiate because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 21 2014 @ 09:36 AM
While fascinating, the fact is HAARP is in relation as powerful as the LHC, poetically speaking.. I can't be bothered to do the math against my own advice because frankly - it will be ignored. Do it yourself and share the findings if it bothers you, videos and nutjob blogs don't qualify, do your own research. If you think I'm a hypocrite then yes, I am - and I'm also probably a lot smarter than you even if my grammar and spelling is off.

The interaction is just nowhere near as powerful as what's experienced naturally anyway. We're monkey's with car keys - but someone's fitted a limiter. So we're learning - a lot in fairness. But we haven't reached the level of making a real difference to life as a whole on this planet. Forgetting the massive number of individual species we are responsible for making extinct every day. As a whole I'm talking about here, for clarification - I hope this is clear.

Even all of our 'magnificent' nuclear weapon tests over the years have probably done little more that raise the levels of cancer incidents along with all of the other crap in our foodchain. Planet's radioactive anyway or we would all be dead (or different from an alternative evolutionary path).. Decay Heat
Just go to Cornwall, UK - A mine from when it (radium to be exact) was used to make paint to decorate things and stuff before people realised it was like... you know... radioactive and what that meant. You could just pick it up off the ground around there even in fairly recent years until people like me picked it up to test our geeky geiger counter collections or to sell on eBay. Radioactivity is everywhere, naturally. It's why we're alive, in our current form though ironically it can also kill us. This digresses, I ramble - apologies.

We've probably let off more nuclear weapons when testing than in an actual war - but it's still sunny outside.. We're not as powerful as we think,and probably wipe our own fragile species out before the planet as a whole. Point is, HAARP is cool and as a Ham Radio guy since I was 14 that can't be bothered to speak to anyone I appreciate the experiment - but it really wasn't as great as you think. I kind of wish it was, in that we could have that level of influence. Though, I don't think humans are responsible enough yet, so I'm even more glad we don't.

posted on May, 21 2014 @ 09:48 AM

originally posted by: AgentSmith
We've probably let off more nuclear weapons when testing than in an actual war

Only by a factor of a thousand (or 500 if you limit it to the USA)

There have been 2,119 nuclear weapons detonations globally, according to Wikipedia. Of those, just 2 were used in anger.


posted on May, 21 2014 @ 10:33 AM
a reply to: Rob48

Thank you :-) I'm at the point, and especially at this precise moment today, where I really can't be bothered to post and quote the exact figures, do the calculations or even try to educate people on a factual level. Which is hypocritical I know, but even I'm not perfect... Just so fed up with people on a whole in general, we're at a point in our evolution where we have an immense amount of knowledge at our fingertips, everyone, and people are so eager to be spoonfed it's sickening.

Want to buy without knowing what they're buying, want to believe without knowing what it is they believe in. So sad...

posted on May, 21 2014 @ 10:31 PM

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Wolfenz

A Big What if We Could Amplify to a Degree to make it Work ( Very Strong Signal ) Using ? AHH Something like a Storage Compassitor SHIVA Star like Device for a Pulse BOOST ?
If you're going to do that why bother with HAARP? But it seems like a lot of trouble when lightning does the job, even if you have to wait a while.

But what they found with inducing VLF with the heater is that there is not a linear relationship between the power used and the strength of the VLF emissions. The higher the power transmitted, the less the increase in VLF power. The indication being that there would be a saturation point where it wouldn't matter how much power you transmitted, you wouldn't get more VLF.

that HAARP (( Thought )) of Using a SHIVA as Far as I can Remember not sure what the Video was Called
Doesn't make sense. You don't power radio transmitters with a bazillion watts of instantaneous power. The purpose of HAARP is to use HF radio to fiddle with the ionosphere. One blast from SHIVA would turn the transmitters into ashes.

"Strong electromagnetic signals were observed from the burst, as were significant magnetic field disturbances and earth currents."
Yes. An EMP, electromagnetic pulse.

Well as you said Why Bother I wasn't exactly speaking of the SHIVA STAR i was referring something like Shiva
a Very Dilute SHIVA STAR . some Storage Compassiter .. as you said turning the Transmitters into ASHES from the Actual SHIVA STAR I would think much Worse .. but Truthfully PHAGE I did hear someone that Worked at the HAARP Facility Mentioned about Shiva ( not Saying the Shiva Star ) at the Facility, just Maybe it was EISCAT as i was at the time, i was doing a little Research about HAARP and EISCAT when the FAMED Norway Spiral Came about one side said it was a failed Spiraling out of control Rocket during reentry then dissipated, Some said it was a EISCAT doing a experiments with Such and such .. tho the Offical Story was a Failed Missile in its 3rd Stage

From what i understand is EISCAT has different Capability's then HAARP more of Guiding and Maneuvering

but from what ive have been seeing that EISCAT has a Storage Compassitor of some sort ...

I understand you Point of the VLF

and what I was referring about the Project Star Prime that there is more usage of effective like Plasma & Nuclear Weapons to Disrupt and cause Damage in the Upper Atmosphere especially with EMP on Satilights and Ground Electrical Damage

High-altitude nuclear explosions

by Wm. Robert Johnston
last updated 28 January 2009

High-altitude nuclear explosion

The potential as an anti-satellite weapon became apparent in August 1958 during Hardtack Teak. The EMP observed at the Apia Observatory at Samoa was four times more powerful than any created by solar storms, while in July 1962 the Starfish Prime test damaged electronics in Honolulu and New Zealand (approximately 1,300 kilometers away), fused 300 street lights on Oahu (Hawaii), set off about 100 burglar alarms, and caused the failure of a microwave repeating station on Kauai, which cut off the sturdy telephone system from the other Hawaiian islands. The radius for an effective satellite kill for the various prompt radiations produced by such a nuclear weapon in space was determined to be roughly 80 km. Further testing to this end was carried out, and embodied in a Department of Defense program, Program 437.


before the days of the starwars program

hmm interesting
U.S. Army Successfully Tests Lightning Gun

So the Claims of HAARP as a WEAPON WHY Bother as Man on this planet has far more Damaging Weapons & Tools to do the Job . Tho HAARP was more less part of its Purpose for Breaking the Disruption of Satellite Communication from Natural Weather Effects Tho not so Sure if it can Do the Opposite Blocking Communication.

well I like John Carpenter Idea of Shutting Down the Earth With a Constant EMP >? from the Movie Escape from LA LOL see a previous post ive posted .. purely fiction ..

OHH GOD LOL interesting tho .. Some Truthful events of the Site Below ...

Declassified effects of nuclear weapons and other threats: minimizing weapons effects on civilians

Can Britain and America prevail over an alliance of Russia, China, Iran and North Korea in WWIII? American sanctions on Japan in 1940 led to Pearl Harbor on 7 December 1941, so beware of the lessons of history Mr President, and get civil defense

Starfish Prime

High-altitude nuclear explosion

posted on May, 22 2014 @ 02:24 AM
a reply to: Rob48

The tech for that was discussed in Crichton's novel, State of Fear. He stated that sort of thing is very real. I looked it up back when I read the book, and was able to locate data on the tech. I don't have the book handy right now, but check it out.

posted on May, 27 2014 @ 01:22 AM

originally posted by: jude11

originally posted by: jhn7537
Can't wait to hear the debunkers rebuttals soon enough....

Quite a few here have stated emphatically and with their vast knowledge of technology that HAARP Does NOT have the capability of doing anything whatsoever with the weather. Impossible as a matter of fact. a matter of fact.....


As a matter of fact it still doesn't, some ignoramus in a fancy uniform wouldn't change that just because he reads too much BS on ATS and similar sites and decided it was true.

posted on May, 27 2014 @ 02:06 AM
a reply to: Manitou
Well put,it's a low powered (by today's standards) radio transmitter and nothing else with as much chance of controlling the weather as King Canute had of controlling the sea.

edit on 27-5-2014 by Imagewerx because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 19 2015 @ 06:58 PM
I would be interested on any comments after watching this video.

UK weather Actic blast is MANMADE !!

posted on Jan, 21 2015 @ 12:54 PM
a reply to: sueloujo

When a guy who calls himself 'chemtrail chemtrail' tries to convince us that patterns in clouds that must be 100 kms apart can be caused by microwaves with a wavelength of less than 1 mm,and these are transmitted from a long wire aerial array that is used for the HF band,I couldn't watch more than a couple of minutes into it without losing the will to live.

Again absolutely nothing what so ever to do with HAARP which has been shut down since last year.This has a lot to do with winter like weather conditions at the correct time of year for winter.Nothing to see here,move along please.

posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 04:11 AM
How much energy do these HAARP devices emit? Wouldnt it take a huge amount of energy to counter the Energy of the sun? Granted not the same amount is needed, what fraction of energy is needed to influence the weather?

posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 02:12 PM

originally posted by: DeadSeraph
a reply to: jude11

Already a thread about it here:

Can those of you who think this is proof of weather modification please indicate where you think the proof is? There isn't anything in the source material that talks about weather modification. It talks about controlling the ionosphere (which has some interesting potential by itself).

What exactly does the ionosphere have to do with the weather?

It has everything to do with communication and nothing to do with the weather.

posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 03:09 PM

originally posted by: Merinda
How much energy do these HAARP devices emit? Wouldnt it take a huge amount of energy to counter the Energy of the sun? Granted not the same amount is needed, what fraction of energy is needed to influence the weather?

It uses 3.6 megawatts (3,600,000 watts) of power with an ERP (Effective Radiated Power) of roughly ten times that.The ERP is greater because of the gain of any sort of antenna beam or array,it's all concentrated into a small tight beam (just 1 km square) instead of wasted by flying off in all directions at once.

It's affect on the ionosphere where it does all it's work is a small fraction of what the sun does to it every single day.So yes it would need trillions of watts to be able to do more than nature can.

It can't and never would be able to affect the weather.HAARP works on an area of the ionosphere some 200 miles or so up,all of our weather occurs within about five miles of our earths surface.

top topics

<< 11  12  13   >>

log in