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.

 

Military History Ch. has an interesting Weather War show running

page: 3
18
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 25 2014 @ 02:23 PM
link   
a reply to: smurfy

That sure is interesting: Cash/Landrum. Embarressed to say that I had to look it up because I didn't know what it was.

But yeah it's a perfect example of individuals injured through secret experiments. I mean how hard is it to identify a Chinook?

CH-47D/F Chinook

And they had at least 4 witnesses.




posted on May, 25 2014 @ 05:46 PM
link   

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.




If it's sated as opinion, then it's accepted as such, but when it's stated as fact, which this particular post was, then it goes beyond discussion.

I get your deal. I really do. Open discussion on this topic. I think that would be great. but unfortunately, when folks post things that aren't true, and present them as fact, there are quite a few folks that will accept it as fact, just because it fits their preconceived notion.

I think the reptilians living in center Earth is a fun conspiracy to discuss what if's, but then again, I also understand that the Land of the Lost, was a TV show and not a documentary. My bad.
edit on 25-5-2014 by network dude because: bad spelr



posted on May, 25 2014 @ 07:45 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen



Maybe they can control weather.

Why else would they make treaties ?


Cloud seeding in Vietnam was the reason.



posted on May, 25 2014 @ 07:48 PM
link   
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.

I'm not that sure about how much man did or didn't do in damage to the ionosphere. Some objective research at some point would be good to see, but that will require an open disclosure of what all was done while experimenting with HAARP. How much from the Russian system and what were it's power levels?

The head of the Geo institute in Alaska, in comments on HAARP, plainly described what they were doing in at least part of it but just assured the interviewer that the impact was very very small for area.

Okay... Yeah.. I take the their word for everything. No bias there, for sure.


---

In terms of the electromagnetic reference made? I was quite literally listening to PHD professionals within the past few days on docu-vids, attributing things like the "odd noises in the sky", to a 'perfectly natural phenomenon' that was 'common' from the electro-magnetic field around our planet being physically heard. (A bit more to it than that)

Given that I'm a pretty skeptical bunny, I would also note that part of what the OP video mentions are the efforts involved being as seemingly minor as shifting the jet stream this way or that a small degree. Nothing so dramatic as Katrina or even a Texas hail storm. Long term trends....is what some of that is talking about, which dovetails to other data.

I am interested in what other members have to say on all this, and that note in particular got my attention.



posted on May, 25 2014 @ 07:56 PM
link   
a reply to: AlphaHawk

America had no corner on the market of terminally stupid for this one, then or possibly now.

Rain-making link to killer floods

Things like that probably fueled at least some of the concerns from those nations who had already done similar things or knew of where it had been done.

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.
edit on 5/25/2014 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 26 2014 @ 05:31 AM
link   
a reply to: Wrabbit2000




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.


So now how does one explain the fact that this flood has happened many times before planes could fly and clouds being seeded.


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.[3] 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.[3] The lack of satellite data in 1952 meant the weather could not be forecast as reliably as it can be today.[3]

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.[citation needed]

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.[4]


And then we have this...


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".[9] 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."[9] 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.[9] 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.[9]


en.wikipedia.org...

So this is just another conspiracy for those who feel the big bad gov't is against it's own people when in reality it was mother nature who caused the flood not the big bad gov't.
edit on 26-5-2014 by tsurfer2000h because: (no reason given)


And we also have this...from the 1770 floods.


"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."


www.exmoor-nationalpark.gov.uk...

And this for the last part of this post...


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).


www.exmoor-nationalpark.gov.uk...
edit on 26-5-2014 by tsurfer2000h because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 26 2014 @ 06:28 AM
link   
a reply to: tsurfer2000h



So now how does one explain the fact that this flood has happened many times before planes could fly and clouds being seeded.

It's quite clear that cloud seeding affects the past. Couple that with the fact that TPTB lie to us and there's seemingly no limit to the damage we can inflict upon our ancestors through increases in chemical technology. There's wormholes in the ionosphere doncha know.



posted on May, 26 2014 @ 06:34 AM
link   
(Self Snip)

I'll reply later when your editing is complete.
edit on 5/26/2014 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 26 2014 @ 06:45 AM
link   
a reply to: DenyObfuscation

I relayed the BBC report. I did not write it. As with the OP story, you're welcome to contact those who did produce the on-air episode and/or print version.

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.



posted on May, 26 2014 @ 07:06 AM
link   

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.


I must not belong here. I see that as no different then me stating categorically that chemtrails don't and cannot exist. Which is a statement that you yourself have said has no basis in fact. I agree, nobody can prove they "don't" exist.

So since this needs to be a one sided thing, I'll be off.



posted on May, 26 2014 @ 07:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Wrabbit2000




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)


You can write it in the sky over any large city, that still doesn't prove the big bad gov't caused this flood.

Which btw you are trying to say whether you wrote the article or not you are using it as proof, when in reality it is not proof the gov't of England caused the flood.



posted on May, 26 2014 @ 07:14 AM
link   
a reply to: Wrabbit2000




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.



Your parroting what was said by the BBC when there is no evidence the gov't caused this flood. You didn't add the little bit of info in your first post about this flood that it has happened many times before this incident, why?

If your going to have a serious discussion on this subject you need to provide all sides and not just the conspiratorial side of the discussion.



posted on May, 26 2014 @ 07:27 AM
link   
a reply to: tsurfer2000h

I relayed a major media article on a historic event where the BBC gives a supported alternate theory. I did not write it. This is a HIGHLY SPECULATIVE topic. You will NEVER get your absolute standard of proof. It won't come on anything of a speculative nature, as it would no longer be speculative if such standard of proof had ever been met.

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.

Those are the rules and policy I'm following while posting in here. Particularly, with respect to everyone's opinion without ridicule or cynicism. (However unlikely some theories in this forum are....not my place to tell them it's impossible...even if I believe it) Not personal. Never ridiculing.

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.



posted on May, 26 2014 @ 07:55 AM
link   
a reply to: Wrabbit2000




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.



I an quite familiar with the those, so why do you feel the need to post that?

And please show me anywhere in any of my posts that makes you feel the need to post that as if I violated any of those?


edit on 26-5-2014 by tsurfer2000h because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 26 2014 @ 08:01 AM
link   
a reply to: Wrabbit2000




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?

So they must have if you feel the need to have me read the rules of this forum.
edit on 26-5-2014 by tsurfer2000h because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 26 2014 @ 12:48 PM
link   
a reply to: tsurfer2000h


In these aggressive replies has any of it violated the T&C's of this site?


That's not for me to say one way or another. I'm not staff in this forum and I have no realistic mod ability here.

The thread is about the program broadcast by Military History and not about me, debunking everything said in every sentence written, or anything else.

I'd appreciate keeping to the topic from here on out, as the thread is pretty torn up as it is...

Thank you for your very energetic and very determined contributions though.. Your enthusiasm always adds something to the debate.




posted on May, 26 2014 @ 02:14 PM
link   
a reply to: tsurfer2000h


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.

Are you saying that Soviet scientists designed HIPAS?

HIPAS

What portions of HAARP were designed by Soviets? Do you have patents to show this?

Timelines of ionospheric heating generally all attribute the design and concept to Eastlund or, earlier, Tesla (he wasn't a Soviet as far as I know.)

How the technology exchanged hands is a bit murkier and does involve some Russian scientists (after the collapse of the U.S.S.R.) being brought over to work on this technology.

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?



posted on May, 26 2014 @ 02:28 PM
link   
It has always been my understanding that HAARP is/was unique among ionospheric heaters. Unique in damage potential. Even an early video that quotes managers and administrators from HAARP has them all saying that HAARP is unique among ionospheric heaters because of its' power.

In the 90's when HAARP was being constructed and getting ready for action, the European Parliament tried to get representatives from the U.S. to come and answer questions on potential damage to the ionosphere. I don't recall other ionospheric heaters eliciting any of this:

HAARP - a weapons system which disrupts the climate


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.



posted on May, 26 2014 @ 02:34 PM
link   
a reply to: luxordelphi




What portions of HAARP were designed by Soviets? Do you have patents to show this?


And where did I say that?

You sure get stuck on patents don't you?

I am sure this conversation has been done before so no need getting into that again.




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?


So your going to deny that Russia had a commissioned an ionospheric heater six yearts before Eastlund filed for his patent?

Are you trying to say because he had a patent that was for something more powerful than HAARP that is proof he invented HAARP?

You seem to get stuck in the Eastlund invented HAARP because he a patent loop even after being shown in multiple threads that a patent is not proof he had anything to do with HAARP


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.


and this...


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.


skeptoid.com...

And here is some more about HAARP...

www.skeptic.com...



posted on May, 26 2014 @ 03:10 PM
link   
a reply to: luxordelphi



Are you saying that Soviet scientists designed HIPAS?
Now that he's replied I'll just add this

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[1]. 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.
www.thelivingmoon.com...



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join