It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Wrabbit2000
a reply to: network dude
I didn't realize we'd reached a point where injecting a difference of opinion could be classified as "Dangerous Misinformation". That's a far more dangerous place to be in public discussion than any topic it could refer to.
I personally welcome all views and opinions on my threads for these topics and without giving anyone the impression they've said something wrong or....dangerous.
I figured I'd toss that in so people know they are more than welcome to voice any viewpoint.
Unearthed documents suggest experiment triggered torrent that killed 35 in Devon disaster
That was clear back in 1952. I think Governments have shown a real issue with doing things in the name of science which are risky, while they assume those risks for us. Sometimes it blows up or...drowns..as the case may be, right back at them.
The root cause of the flood was heavy rainfall associated with a low-pressure area that had formed over the Atlantic ocean some days earlier. As the low passed the British Isles, it manifested as a weather front which caused exceptionally heavy rainfall, the effect of which was intensified because the rain fell on already waterlogged land; the effect was further exacerbated over Exmoor by an orographic effect. The lack of satellite data in 1952 meant the weather could not be forecast as reliably as it can be today.
Similar floods had been recorded at Lynmouth in 1607 and 1796. After the 1952 disaster, Lynmouth village was rebuilt, including diverting the river around the village. The small group of houses on the bank of the East Lyn river called Middleham between Lynmouth and Watersmeet was destroyed and never rebuilt. Today, there stands a memorial garden.
On 16 August 2004, a similar event happened in Cornwall, when flash floods caused extensive damage to Boscastle, but without loss of life. The hydrological setting of these two villages is very much the same.
Experts have said the experiments could not have caused the accident. Meteorologist Philip Eden provides several reasons why "it is preposterous to blame the Lynmouth flood on such experiments". Eden notes that "there has never been unequivocal evidence of how successful these rain-making programmes have been" but that the technology was not secret. According to Eden, "rain-making experiments were talked about all over the place in the early-1950s and that The Royal Meteorological Society's popular magazine, Weather, devoted a whole issue to the subject in July 1952 - just a month before the Lynmouth disaster." Eden explains, that Frank Ludlam of Imperial College, described in detail the physical processes underpinning cloud-seeding research in the UK" but that "scientists involved in rainfall stimulation were only interested in seeding individual cumulus clouds" rather than large scale experiments. Last, according to Eden, the rain clouds over the Southern U.K. in August 1952 were part of a large depression that was several hundred miles across. "Heavy rain fell over the whole of the West Country and South Wales, and it was caused by a depression which had stagnated in the Southwest Approaches for two days." Eden says, "Similar depressions have triggered serious flooding in southwest England at regular intervals, and previous devastating floods hit Lynmouth in the 18th and 19th centuries" and "prolonged heavy rain associated with it was caused by the large-scale lifting of very moist air." He does not believe cloud-seeding would have made much of an impact to amount of rain released by the depression.
"The river at Lynmouth by the late rain rose to such a degree as was never known by the memory of any man now living, which brought down great rocks of several tons each, and choked up the harbour. And also carried away the foundation under the Kay on that side of the river six foot down and ninety foot long, and some places two foot under the Kay, which stands now in great danger of falling."
The following is an account from writer S H Burton:
"Lynmouth. The vast downpour that descended on the Chains was refused by the waterlogged, impervious land. Down every gully and natural depression, down the channels dug by John Knight, down the northwards running combes, the thousands of tons of water flowed into the East and West Lyn rivers. Farley Water and Hoaroak Water joined the already swollen East Lyn at Watersmeet. Half a dozen streams converging at the head waters of the West Lyn brought the deluge from the western Chains, and at Barbrook Mill another influx from Woolhanger Common joined the raging torrent, sweeping bridges and houses away before starting the last deadly descent into Lynmouth", (Burton, 1952. 335).
So now how does one explain the fact that this flood has happened many times before planes could fly and clouds being seeded.
originally posted by: Wrabbit2000
a reply to: network dude
Well, I happen to believe the opinion you were characterizing as dangerous misinformation may have some basis in truth. Personally, that's how I feel.
Frankly, I'm content with what I've read from them in terms of it being a highly speculative topic to chat about. I couldn't find the broadcast episode. Perhaps someone else can to add to the thread. (If it's CW legal of course)
Can you note where someone mentioned wormholes though? I'm trying to have a serious discussion with some of the members who do take the topic seriously.
When you have the opportunity, take a moment and read this.
IMPORTANT: Understanding The Geo-Engineering And Chemtrails Forum
Also, I'd ask, though I can't do more as a member here, that you read this...
Chemtrail Forum and the T&C.
In general terms here, overall for the thread, I hope we can all do the same. Frankly, even I'm feeling a bit put off from posting for the daunting number of aggressive replies.
In these aggressive replies has any of it violated the T&C's of this site?
In fact the USSR had one commisioned 6 years before Eastlund filed for his patent, so in all reality Russia is the father of HAARP.
From the 1950s the USA conducted explosions of nuclear material in the Van Allen Belts(24) to investigate the effect of the electro-magnetic pulse generated by nuclear weapon explosions at these heights on radio communications and the operation of radar. This created new magnetic radiation belts which covered nearly the whole earth. The electrons travelled along magnetic lines of force and created an artificial Aurora Borealis above the North Pole. These military tests are liable to disrupt the Van Allen belt for a long period. The earth's magnetic field could be disrupted over large areas, which would obstruct radio communications. According to US scientists it could take hundreds of years for the Van Allen belt to return to normal. HAARP could result in changes in weather patterns. It could also influence whole ecosystems, especially in the sensitive Antarctic regions.
Another damaging consequence of HAARP is the occurrence of holes in the ionosphere caused by the powerful radio beams. The ionosphere protects us from incoming cosmic radiation. The hope is that the holes will fill again, but our experience of change in the ozone layer points in the other direction. This means substantial holes in the ionosphere that protects us.
What portions of HAARP were designed by Soviets? Do you have patents to show this?
So are you saying that Eastlund was just chosen to be the name on the patents? Do you have some place that you're getting this information from or is this something that you've pieced together somehow?
Dr. Eastlund's patent, which has since become popularly known (though inaccurately) as the "HAARP patent", is widely reproduced online, often with much commentary from authors making their own interpretations of how it might be used. Specifically, the patent involves using natural gas to generate electricity to create electromagnetic radiation to excite a tiny section of the ionosphere to about 2 electron volts, thus moving it upward along the lines of the magnetic field. The conspiracy theorists, once again, completely ignore the fact that this can only happen in the ionosphere, and they interpret it as a weather control system or earthquake generating system. Such extrapolations are without any plausible foundation.
A further disconnect in this conspiracy claim is that Dr. Eastlund's patent was for a speculative and unproven device approximately one million times as powerful as HAARP. The patent does not mention HAARP, and none of its drawings remotely resemble anything built at HAARP. For perspective, HAARP's antenna array measures about 1000 feet on a side. A device such as that imagined by Dr. Eastlund would have been 14 miles on a side, with one million antenna elements, compared to HAARP's 180. Furthermore, Dr. Eastlund left APTI to found his own company before the HAARP program began, and was never associated with the program.
Now that he's replied I'll just add this
Are you saying that Soviet scientists designed HIPAS?
The Sura Ionospheric Heating Facility, located near the small town of Vasilsursk about 100 km eastward from Nizhniy Novgorod in Russia, is a laboratory for ionosphere research. Sura is capable of radiating about 190 MW, effective radiated power (ERP) on short waves. This facility is operated by the radiophysical research institute NIRFI in Nizhny Novgorod. The Sura facility was commissioned in 1981. Using this facility, Russian researchers achieved extremely interesting results regarding the ionosphere behavior and discovered the effect of generation of low-frequency emission at the modulation of ionosphere current. At the beginning, Soviet Defense Department mostly footed the bill. The American HAARP ionospheric heater is similar to the Sura facility. The HAARP project began in 1993.