ALERT NW Manipulation of JET

Above is a Am89 from 11-27-05.

It's actions will be reflected today.
The storm system on the NW Paciffic Coast should be intresting . It should guide it to the NE Notice where I have drawn a arrow showing the motion of the line moving up Not over the line but under the line.Also I want to point out here we have a good example of teethered action notice the 2 black beams near the bottom and then the beam fades up then black agin to the next point to the left where I have put a X.

I hope by marking the charts this helps some

Here are the links to the graphs and charts.
The first is the HAARP Magnetometer . From there you can do backround checks on several station and historical checks on dates and check for activity...

137.229.36.30...

Speculation here is when Gak has a Lack of activity and the top 3 stations have activty tectonic activity will occur. Theory study will need to be done.Basiclly it shows they are excting the Northern Ionsphere in my opinoin and the idea is somewhat lopsided and speculatice. When on and off function creates a circular function over Gak and reads would go up and down.When focused only to one side makes me wonder the the heck they are doing.

Below is the Spectrum MHZ Plot Graph. It is only a 30 minute graph with no history.

www.haarp.alaska.edu...

Other links can be found at the sites.

More investigation and more eyes welcome

What about this blizzard that shut down I-70? Oh great, now I have to discern between engineered freak storms or real freak storms.

Seriously though, if this thread or any like it actually predict a huge storm, I'll be impressed. The pictures look interesting and sounds like you've spent a long time looking at them. And yes, your graphics and arrows do help somewhat. Keep up the good work!

So, I asked these questions in the other thread.

Will he answer them here?


Christodd, how do you explain the one crucial flaw in your theory?

How can HAARP affect the moisture in a cloud?

Be specific, I want to know the specific molecule (i.e. nitrogen, oxygen, water vapor, water droplets, etc) that is being “heated” by the EM energy.

What is the specific wavelength of that energy?

I await your explanation.

[edit on 28-11-2005 by HowardRoark]

As said before I do not have all the answers

I did not come here to fight.

I came here to present eveidence that I collect both daily and from the past.

I have only started to present a vast collection what I have from Katrina onward .

I maintain so many forums and threads it will take time.

I want to make allies and friends to get the answers to make the puzzle shrink.

You seem to know alot about weather perhaps you can help.

There is so much to cover and I need help to get it done. I do not know everything

[edit on 29-11-2005 by Christodd]

People - what is all the hostility? ChrisTodd himself proclaims not to know all the answers, in fact, he is asking for input on things he sees and professes to not understand entirely himself.

Chris - be wary, you are being baited into possibly crossing the lines of T&C and landing yourself a ban if you take it all to heart and continue insulting members flat out.

I request some of the more established members back off a bit and discuss the information being presented here without the insults yourselves. State your opinions, and lets discuss them.

Todd is fairly new here and it's too soon to judge. It's a conspiracy site folks. Let's allow a new member to present what concerns him and see what develops, instead of confrontation to the point of exasperation.

I will not even answer anymore, no insults. I understand what is going on about baiting. Thanks for the heads up. I will chill. I came here to get help and try to get more answers, to make the puzzle smaller not to fight.

Sometimes a action requires more then 1 satt or 1 image to explain. It runs a series. It in theory is called basicly networking much like you would do with a computer.The best way to explain this is to show this.

Image 1 The Nepac AM89 JET . Follow the arrows to the yellow beam then down. Next Lets go to image 2.

Image 2. EPAC AM89 . Our Yellow beam from the Nepac image comes down here into the C. America area then cuts right.Then makes a turn towards Florida see the yellow color spray about in the beam that dropped thru Mexico and came up to Florida . Now lets move to image 3.



Image 3 & 4 WATL & NWATL AM89 . I want to point out 2 area's of deep radaint energy highlighted with yellow. One is way up in the Candaian Marintines and the other is nested in the upper Gulf. . Notice also in the Atlantic the Wedge and the Low Highlighted with the Red.
Seems like there is some moderate deep convection over Florida and just off the west coast but a defined Low has not devloped at least not as of yet.

Christodd, you have presented a theory here. You need to be able to defent that theory and to provide answers for the questions that arise about your theory. If you can't, then I suggest that you "go back to the drawing board."

Originally posted by HowardRoark
Christodd, you have presented a theory here.

Where? ...I only see suggestions, hints, and a bit of an outline - nothing hard and fast.

In fact, I'd like to see more description and explanation to accompany the pics.

You need to be able to defent that theory and to provide answers for the questions that arise about your theory. If you can't, then I suggest that you "go back to the drawing board."

Seems to me Christodd is throwing info out, asking for more to be added to the mix - and hoping for some honest-to-goodness as-promised-in-the-promo bloody effing collaboration.


Christodd - my rule of thumb here? When all the trolls start crawling out of the woodwork to rip you up, then you're pretty much guaranteed to be onto something hot. Stick with it.

But - I'd still like a nice tight paragraph that describes exactly what you're trying to show.

I think Christodd has very poor communication skills. Blaming that fact on his anger at the USA for using weather weapons (which he is not willing to explain to us) doesn't change things.

Christodd, if you don't take the time to patiently educate your audience, how to expect to reach them? You must understand one key fact: Weather maps are boring as hell to most people. Weather itself is boring to most people. Also, the colors on your maps are different, and you don't explain the differences. You'll use two maps, one blue and one yellow, and then you'll point to the colors, but I'm still not getting it.

Why not take a little time to expand your comments between images? Are you being so fast with your posts because you want to score big with a prediction? That's a pretty silly goal if it comes at the cost of your audiences' comprehension, I'd say.

I predict little success at ATS if you're starting out defensive and calling members disinfo agents like on the other thread. Sure there's disinformation people on the web, but it's not you versus the world. We all would like to know what you are so excited about, but so far, only you are up to speed on what you're talking about.



[edit on 29-11-2005 by smallpeeps]

Originally posted by soficrow
Christodd - my rule of thumb here? When all the trolls start crawling out of the woodwork to rip you up, then you're pretty much guaranteed to be onto something hot. Stick with it.

But - I'd still like a nice tight paragraph that describes exactly what you're trying to show.

He might be onto something, but what good is it when he can't even explain it to people in simple terms that everyone can understand. I've seen all kinds of technical terms, and someone who gets angry when other people don't understand, and a complete inability to "dumb it down" so that ordinary people can understand.

I'm not attcking you or your theory ChrisTood, I just would like to see you explain things so that the ordinary layman can understand it. Is that so hard to do?

Weather sat communication problems, a field of view that doesn't overlap previous scans, and/or a sat being in an eclipse mode has nothing to do with weather control.

Areas absent of data weren't scanned by the satellite when they were peiced together for the compostition view, so try another satellite.

NOAA KLM USER'S GUIDE
www2.ncdc.noaa.gov...

I suggest you actually study before making up fictional ideas.
amsu.cira.colostate.edu...




Those black areas are between swaths/passes and are not scanned by a polar orbting satellite.





[edit on 29-11-2005 by Regenmacher]

Some yes but not all.I have been looking at and using this imagery for a long time. I said on another thread this is exactly how NOAA explained it.
I assure you watch it long enough this is not the case.While indeed there are blanks many times if you follow the action a day or 2 later something often occurs where the beams or the disruption in the AM89 GHZ imagery shows.

here is a example no black beam visable. It was in a earlier AM89 image .
Here is the after effects of the said action. While the Black is no longer Visable the outline is present.
I only blame the United States because the Senate Bill and Haarp and a few other secrative moves made DOD SATT launches etc..

Scott Stevans and others think it may be Russia or China

This is a example of a transfer shown in 2 frames.



I have put 2 images of each 1 marked and 1 not so I can point out the transfer.With image 1 I have outlined the triangle with black and I have used red to show the path that our energy that is off the West Coast of Florida will travel.You can see the deep Red area off the South West coast Of Florida,Notice where I have the red arrow pointing to.





Image 2 . This is the next in the timeline of the AM89 imagery.Agin I have marked the outline of the triangle shape.I have marked a X where our energy used to be off the SW Florida Coast. Now notice where the Black beam ends and above where I have put the check mark.

Alot of activity occured yesterday this is only 2 moves,


I'm open to all ideals here . I will keep posting daily observations.I know there are many skeptics. I do not have all the answers.
I'm sorry if I come off like a ass sometimes. I get a little fustrated when people try to trip me over and over. I will try to answer questions but I can not answer all the questions when I do not know all the answers. That is why I came here. A freind suggested I do so. He said here I would find some of the best online and if anyone could help here I would find them.

When I got here I got attacked by a few right off the bat and got a little defensive. I'm sorry. I will just have to learn to look the other way. I'm not use to these kind of right out attacks and was not ready for it.

Some of what NOAA says makes sense. But when you see direct action Occur from the said blanks over and over I have to question it. And with all going on shouldn't I ?

Originally posted by Christodd
That is why I came here. A freind suggested I do so. He said here I would find some of the best online and if anyone could help here I would find them.

That is true.... and welcome.

Originally posted by Christodd
When I got here I got attacked by a few right off the bat and got a little defensive. I'm sorry. I will just have to learn to look the other way.

It is unfortunate that happened, but you are right to just ignore it. The more mature members on the site should have the ability to question or disagree without the intention to offend or attack. (As a side note, the SKUNK WORKS forum absolutely prohibits that behavior.)

Again, welcome.

Chris,

I just wanted you to understand that even at ATS, members occasionally have a "conspiracy fatigue." Technical descriptions, in a rushed, English as second language kind of way tend to put off a lot of people as the kind of paranoia which has brought us Meteoric apocalypse, suitcase nukes, FEMA detention camps and impending Civil War. I think this community is as open minded as any you may find, but it will take patience on both sides for us to flesh out these theories. The important thing is that both sides just take time with this, us in reading and responding and you, Chris with authorship.

- Mainer

Ok here is the example I showed earlier in the thread where the so called Polar Black out did not occur but you could see the outline. This is the action in AM89 imagery. Are these just Polar missing Data ?. Or is that what we are being told.Many are buying this concept and for a long time I did . I was taught that this is the way it was, missing data just overlook it. Then why does something always occur where this said missing data takes place. It just does not make sense to me the answers NOAA gives and what they teach. So I refuse to except this.





Below is the Examples caught from the Dundee station. I have outlined the triangles so they would be easier to see.Black out missing data. I do not buy it over and over agin I see a reaction for a action.Cause and Effect.All the years I spent wasted thinking what NOAA said without questioning. From now on I'm documenting every single move.









The below is likey a example of missing data







No I do not have all the answers. But this site has some of the best minds on the internet this is why I came here.

Thanks to Dundee Satellite Receiving Station for the Satt Images below is a link to the site.

www.sat.dundee.ac.uk...

Mainer
I agree , My grammer is crap and a weakness always was.I almost did not make it thru because of it.

When I slow it down I make more sense. It is the slowing down part I have a problem with. I guess I need to back off a little take more time in writting a thread and thought into my replies.

I'm sorry guys for acting this way....

Chris,
If it's worth anything, I think I see what your getting at. There is, in some of your pictures at least, a clear match between the previous "blacked out" areas, then a matching shape on the weather map later on.

I think, as far as disinfo goes, if there is something up they are using the obvious lack of sat coverage on composite pistures to mask when they do remove a section that is part of their plan.

I see it like, if every now and then your phone line crackled, just normal run of the mill crackling, nothing to worry about, happens all the time. Now if someone wanted to "tap" your line, which caused it too crackle, you wouldn't notice it as you would put it down to "normal" crackling.....

Kind of like Zebras, they hide in a crowd of Zebras so one Zebra doesn't stand out....

As the others have said, don't get put off by the usual bunch of misfits who seem to revel in putting down everyone, regardless of what they have to say.

I also noticed you said there would be quakes, then there were two. If you can do that again (as in "predict" something), then I think you may be on to something big and certainly swing many of your detractors round.

Christodd, I would also like to apologize. Some of your earlier post triggered my b.s. alarm and I’m sorry if I jumped all over you so quickly.

Back to the topic, can you elaborate on a few things?

It has been pointed out by others that the conventional explanation for the “black zones” (triangles, lines etc.) are the result of either

1. gaps in satellite coverage, or
   
   
2. Bad data in the download from the satellite.
   
   
   
   Can you please explain why you do not think this is so?
   
   Do you have any special information on these satellites imagery systems that you could share with us?
   
   How many different satellites are there?
   
   How does the image capture system work? (i.e. what wavelengths and what can interfere with the image capture)
   
   What kind of orbits do these satellites have?
   
   How is the data processed to produce the images that you have shown us?
   
   We really do appreciate the work you’ve put into this, and would like for you to share more, but you really have to start with a few fundamentals so that we are all on the same page. Thanks.