Contrails and microwaves

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on Dec, 20 2003 @ 08:00 PM
link   
From the other thread

I decided to post this in a new thread, because the other one is getting a bit unwieldy and long, too many cross tangents.


Any way, the basic course of a couple of posts:


Originally posted by mikromarius

Originally posted by HowardRoark
HAARP is a giant microwave oven. (sorry I couldn't resist
)


And that was funny because? Microwaves can heat up any given "object" super fast and at low energy costs compared to other techniques. And when they seem to spread metal in the air the effect of such heating is multiplied several times. Microwaves produce heat. And such heat can indeed modify the weather, creating clouds and even earthquakes. Period.

Blessings,
Mikromarius


To which I Replied:


Originally posted by HowardRoark

Do you know how microwave ovens work?

Apparently not.


Google it, read up, and try to clarify your theory a bit, because I don't don'r quite understand what you are assuming here.




To clarify a little on my part:


Microwaves can heat up any given "object" super fast and at low energy costs compared to other techniques.


Yes and no. You have to understand just how a microwave oven works. A microwave oven is in fact a "resonance cavity" That is, in simple terms, it is a metal box inside of which microwaves bounce around, confined by the fact that microwaves are reflected by metal.

An analogy: imagine a guitar with one string. If you take a tuning fork with the same frequency as the string and put it inside the sound box then twang the string, that tuning fork is going to vibrate like crazy. Now if you take that same guitar string and stretch it between two points in space (to the proper tension). If your tuning fork is in the same relative position as the first time and you twang the string, the sound will not be as loud and the tuning fork will not vibrate to the same degree as the first time.

Or better yet, lets take our guitar and toss it into a wood chipper. Then we can toss the chips and saw dust in the air while the string is vibrating (a "Guitartrail" ). Does the fork resonate any more? I doubt it.







[Edited on 20-12-2003 by HowardRoark]




posted on Dec, 20 2003 @ 08:15 PM
link   
You started a new thread over this?



posted on Dec, 20 2003 @ 08:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by HowardRoark
From the other thread

I decided to post this in a new thread, because the other one is getting a bit unwieldy and long, too many cross tangents.


An analogy: imagine a guitar with one string. If you take a tuning fork with the same frequency as the string and put it inside the sound box then twang the string, that tuning fork is going to vibrate like crazy. Now if you take that same guitar string and stretch it between two points in space (to the proper tension). If your tuning fork is in the same relative position as the first time and you twang the string, the sound will not be as loud and the tuning fork will not vibrate to the same degree as the first time.

Or better yet, lets take our guitar and toss it into a wood chipper. Then we can toss the chips and saw dust in the air while the string is vibrating (a "Guitartrail" ). Does the fork resonate any more? I doubt it.


[Edited on 20-12-2003 by HowardRoark]


could you make this a little clearer, howard? i have some understanding of these things and i enjoy dancing with you.



posted on Dec, 20 2003 @ 08:40 PM
link   
The point I was trying to make was that the energy efficiency of a microwave oven is due in large part to it’s design, and not necessarily due to the properties of microwave energy.

BTW, it is a common misconception that microwave ovens "Cook from the inside out."



posted on Dec, 20 2003 @ 08:48 PM
link   
okay. so microwaves DO work by exciting the particles to high states of vibration which increases friction between them thereby creating heat.
now, if the layers of atmosphere are the target, why would aiming microwaves at the ionsphere NOT heat it. this is a stated objective of HAARP. if i know the composition of a target layer of atmosphere, i can 'tune' the array to excite whatever type of particle i wish, no?

p.s. cell phones cause tumours. the microwave signal cooks your brain.

[Edited on 20-12-2003 by billybob]



posted on Dec, 20 2003 @ 09:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by billybob
okay. so microwaves DO work by exciting the particles to high states of vibration which increases friction between them thereby creating heat.


A point of clarification, microwaves work by causing polar molecules, ions and some conductive materials to rotate, not vibrate.


now, if the layers of atmosphere are the target, why would aiming microwaves at the ionsphere NOT heat it. this is a stated objective of HAARP.


I thought we were talking about contrail/chemtrails here. It was purported that the purpose of "chemtrails" was to heat the atmosphere via microwave energy.


if i know the composition of a target layer of atmosphere, i can 'tune' the array to excite whatever type of particle i wish, no?


Well, microwaves are not generated in the same fashion as radio waves.

Also, not all materials respond the same way to microwave energy. Aluminum, steel and other metals, reflect microwaves. That is why most radar systems operate in the microwave range. If your "chemtrail" cloud is composed of aluminum particles, then I would expect that the trails would show up on radar screens. Weather radar images would have all sorts of cross hatching on them form all the ‘trails that are supposed to be out there.


p.s. cell phones cause tumours. the microwave signal cooks your brain.


I don’t think that the signal is strong enough to "cook" anything. However, it is possible that there might in fact be other effects other than direct heating that have yet to be determined. The jury is still out on the effects of cell phones, so I am not going to debate you on that issue.



posted on Dec, 20 2003 @ 10:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by HowardRoark


A point of clarification, microwaves work by causing polar molecules, ions and some conductive materials to rotate, not vibrate.


i'm not sure if you're aware, but vibration is not by definition two dimensional. a guitar string doesn't just go up and down. it also goes back and forth, depending on the vector of the initiating force.
it is a charge induced excitement, yes, but to say that this microscopic rotation is not vibration is a little nit-picky, don't you think?


I thought we were talking about contrail/chemtrails here. It was purported that the purpose of "chemtrails" was to heat the atmosphere via microwave energy.


as one possibility, yes. this thread is titled contrails and microwaves, so i think we can talk about the nature of microwaves without it being considered off topic, can't we?


Well, microwaves are not generated in the same fashion as radio waves.


true. they are both waves of energy from a spectrum invisible to humans, though. they have that in common. i don't really know why you brought this up, though.


Also, not all materials respond the same way to microwave energy. Aluminum, steel and other metals, reflect microwaves. That is why most radar systems operate in the microwave range. If your "chemtrail" cloud is composed of aluminum particles, then I would expect that the trails would show up on radar screens. Weather radar images would have all sorts of cross hatching on them form all the ‘trails that are supposed to be out there.


i simply don't know on this one. maybe i'll look into it. see, i admit ignorance when i have it!
i do know that the reported particle size is seven to ten microns. is this enough to total surface area to show on radar, when the particles are spread out? would reflection of microwave energy not increase heating effects in the desired layer? i mean, it's not a big solid sheet of aluminum. it is microscopic particles with vast distance between them.

and what about barium?

Sources

It is found only in combination with other elements, chiefly with sulfate and carbonate and is prepared by electrolysis of the chloride.

Properties

Barium is a metallic element, soft, and when pure is silvery white like lead; it belongs to the alkaline earth group, resembling calcium chemically. The metal oxidizes very easily and should be kept under petroleum or other suitable oxygen-free liquids to exclude air. It is decomposed by water or alcohol.

Uses

The metal is used as a "getter" in vacuum tubes. The most important compounds are the peroxide, chloride, sulfate, carbonate, nitrate, and chlorate. Lithopone, a pigment containing barium sulfate and zinc sulfide, has good covering power, and does not darken in the presence of sulfides. The sulfate, as permanent white is also used in paint, in X-ray diagnostic work, and in glassmaking. Barite is extensively used as a weighing agent in oil well drilling fluids, and is used in making rubber. The carbonate has been used as a rat poison, while the nitrate and chlorate give colors in pyrotechny. The impure sulfide phosphoresces after exposure to the light. All barium compounds that are water or acid soluble are poisonous. Naturally occurring barium is a mixture of seven stable isotopes. Twenty two other radioactive isotopes are known to exist.

WOW! sounds like fun at a party!



posted on Dec, 20 2003 @ 10:07 PM
link   
History

(L. alumen, alum) The ancient Greeks and Romans used alum as an astringent and as a mordant in dyeing. In 1761 de Morveau proposed the name alumine for the base in alum, and Lavoisier, in 1787, thought this to be the oxide of a still undiscovered metal.

Sources

The method of obtaining aluminum metal by the electrolysis of alumina dissolved in cryolite was discovered in 1886 by Hall in the U.S. and at about the same time by Heroult in France. Cryolite, a natural ore found in Greenland, is no longer widely used in commercial production, but has been replaced by an artificial mixture of sodium, aluminum, and calcium fluorides.

Aluminum can now be produced from clay, but the process is not economically feasible at present. Aluminum is the most abundant metal to be found in the earth's crust (8.1%), but is never found free in nature. In addition to the minerals mentioned above, it is found in granite and in many other common minerals.

Properties

Pure aluminum, a silvery-white metal, possesses many desirable characteristics. It is light, it is nonmagnetic and nonsparking, stands second among metals in the scale of malleability, and sixth in ductility.

Uses

It is extensively used for kitchen utensils, outside building decoration, and in thousands of industrial applications where a strong, light, easily constructed material is needed.

Although its electrical conductivity is only about 60% that of copper, it is used in electrical transmission lines because of its light weight. Pure aluminum is soft and lacks strength, but it can be alloyed with small amounts of copper, magnesium, silicon, manganese, and other elements to impart a variety of useful properties.

These alloys are of vital importance in the construction of modern aircraft and rockets. Aluminum, evaporated in a vacuum, forms a highly reflective coating for both visible light and radiant heat. These coatings soon form a thin layer of the protective oxide and do not deteriorate as do silver coatings. They are used to coat telescope mirrors and to make decorative paper, packages, toys.

Compounds

The compounds of greatest importance are aluminum oxide, the sulfate, and the soluble sulfate with potassium (alum). The oxide, alumina, occurs naturally as ruby, sapphire, corundum, and emery, and is used in glassmaking and refractories. Synthetic ruby and sapphire are used in lasers for producing coherent light.



NON magnetic, eh? NON sparking?



posted on Dec, 20 2003 @ 10:10 PM
link   
Well Howard, I am glad to see this subject resurface in a less argumenative thread, I tend to agree with you on the direction the last one took-
Let us look at microwave from the eyes of an installer of these systems- of which I installed many all over the US. I know all on installing these sytems on the tower, and I have been included in many microwave hops, by major telecom companys. Hell, their putting these systems up everywhere, on roof- tops, on towers, on existing towers,etc. I have hung and installed many of the 10'ft HP dishs, they are a bitch to install, especially on remote sites, mountain tops, wind, and working with helicopters.
In ten years of erecting towers, and installing their related systems, i saw many things- but one thing I saw quite a few times was the one that I worry about- and that was all the sites I went to and I would observe dead birds at the base of the tower.... I am not an rf engineer but it makes an impression when you see this.
I have been on towers and evertyhing on me that was metal would get hot....I've tasted the sick taste of the metallic like taste( you know it's time to go then) and what it means(too close to the rf). Being on FM towers is a trip- it does something to your thinking (Yeah, now I guestion what exactly I have exposed myself to) and in the early 90's these systems were going up like wildfire, all over...doing microwave alighnments on new installed systems was what I worried about the most- as you have to "shoot" the next link in the system to alighn with-
This system was pushed and implemented so hard, all over this country, in many different digital sysyems-
They route them through power sub stations, look at the one near you and see if a tower is built on the site....
And do know how the average lease is paid on tower land space? In 20 yr. agreements with the right to renew then, at the end of 20 yrs.
Beware of microwaves- and if you are thinking on climbing towers such as these- do not do it- I've seen too many dead birds-
I know that these microwave beams are transmitted in a dough-nut like shape, and you sure don't want to get in front of these dishes.
HAARP is scary. All you have to do is go to HAARP Home and read the technical specs- very scary.
I believe the entire system is capable, in more ways, than we understand and know. And I believe it is all connected- in a national lay out.
How far can you go without seeing the flashing red lights or the blink of the stobes?
Anyhow, just some thoughts from a former tower erector.



posted on Dec, 20 2003 @ 10:17 PM
link   
very sobering first hand testimony, journey. i need another beer now.



posted on Dec, 20 2003 @ 11:50 PM
link   
comms are done via microwave for cell phones...think about this- very carefully. A tower has an effective operating range of about twelve miles or so- and at 250 ft in height, an average tower.
Broadcast towers, for tv and fm, are the big boys. With all the flashing strobes-those are them. A tall one can go over 2000 feet in height. I have set to 1800 feet, personally(CH 10, Huntsville). Do you know they are changing all the broadcast tv to digital....Well, put it together.
And what about all the cell systems just pointed in the direction of the local population- look on the roof of any high rise that you reside close to- the antennas are pointed into the population.
Usually microwave systems are set in a series of towers, with one centralized location serving as a "backbone" for the systems. these systems may have a dozen towers intertwined-
The electronic cabinets installed in the shelters, or the building housing the equipment, cost in the millions...
Look at the evolution of towers- first you had all the old ATT&T microwave towers with the huge dishes on them that resembled an ice cream cone- now obselete.
Analog cell phones went digital- all the new towers you see springing up everywhere support this digital side of the situation, however some systems carry the digital system via microwave-
And now we are manipulating the ionosphere with HAARP, and who knows what the rest of the story behind all this is-
But there is one, that I fell is big, very big indeed. When I read what was worded at HAARP Home, my attention was got.
No expese is spared in erection of all these systems, I have personally been involved with and erected approx. 250 towers all over this country.
Billions have been spent- If interest in this subject goes further, I have plenty pictures-



posted on Dec, 21 2003 @ 01:01 AM
link   
i find it VERY interesting. in fact, two years ago i was driving the 400 highway in ontario, and i noticed a strange EXTREMELY bright light in the sky, towards the sun. it was barely moving it seemed. i thought it might be an aircraft, but the light seemed too bright. i watched it closely for about two minutes, keeping only the corner of my eye on the road. i looked at the road briefly(like, a second), because there were a lot of cars around me. when i looked back it was gone. i was pretty sure i'd just seen a ufo(bt definition, i did. it wasn't necessarily a spacecraft, but i couldn't identify it).
anyhooo, to make a short story long.... i hadn't been up that road for a year or two, and i was SHOCKED at the proliferation of towers. the countryside was littered with them. it really got to me. not only was it hideous, but i had an instinctual gut feeling of foreboding associated with them. i still do. i hate them!
when i got to where i was going, i didn't even talk about a ufo i'd just seen. all's i could think about was that there seemed to be a tower for every friggin' cell phgone user. WAY too many towers. i'd already heard about the russian woodpecker signal, and i thought the towers were an extension of this kind of agenda. i still do.
it's no good i tells ya!



posted on Dec, 21 2003 @ 01:16 AM
link   
I dont see the need for a new thread on this subject as its only going to lead the same place as The previous thread by Bangin.



posted on Dec, 21 2003 @ 02:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by tracer
I dont see the need for a new thread on this subject as its only going to lead the same place as The previous thread by Bangin.


Well, I am just attempting to add another perspective to the overall picture of Haarp, contrails, and microwave- and it does seem to me as this should be considered in the overall picture- the time line is interesting in my view. And seems connected-

Are we predicting the outcome of this thread? or discussing the connection of above-



posted on Dec, 21 2003 @ 03:01 PM
link   
I had a real good link to how cell systems opperate. It was pretty informative.

One question. Do "chemtrails" absorb microwave (i.e. like radar) energy or reflect it?

if they reflect microwave energy, then I would expect that they would show up on radar screens as rapidly moving lines. Since we don't see those, then do they absorb the energy?

If so, could the chemicals that are used to make chemtrails be put into a paint film?

Would this make for a great, low cost, low tech stealth system?

Just paint your airplane with barium sulfate and Voila, it is invisible to radar.



posted on Dec, 21 2003 @ 03:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by mikromarius

Do you agree that the air is full of water and biological material. If so do you then agree that it is possible to heat up the air by microwaves? What's your point?

Blessings,
Mikromarius


My point is that the energy required to do this would be so great, that it would approch a significant fraction of the total, and I mean total energy use in the U.S.

Furthermore, you would be fighting against the inverse square law.

Yes it is possible, in an abstract way. is it practical? Not in a million years.



posted on Dec, 22 2003 @ 02:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by mikromarius

Originally posted by HowardRoark
See the other thread for my response to this.


You can bloody well answer me here I'd say. Give me your proofs here that it is impossible to heat up layers of the air (indirectly of course) with microwaves. When water and biological material is heated up, the air around it will also heat up in time. Correct? If you cook a dinner on a plate in a mw oven long enough, the plate will become hot as hell to use a fitting word. Or are you denying the science beloved laws of thermodynamics or whatever it is called here? Just one degree celcius up or down could mean serious change in weather.

Blessings,
Mikromarius


No, Mikromarius, I will answer you here, that is why I started this thread,

I have never denied that it is possible to heat up water or “biological material,” whatever that is, with microwave energy. I am saying that it is impossibly impractical to do so if your intent is to try to impact the weather. If you tried to do this, you would heat up the atmosphere all right, not from microwave energy, but rather from the thermal pollution from all of the power plants that you would need to operate.

Go on the net and find a source for weather satellite photos for your area. Find one that depicts a frontal system moving through. Print out the map and take a pen and circle an area consists of oh, let’s say 5 % of the total extent of the frontal system. Now look closely at the map. How big of an area is this? 1000 square kilometers? . (do it in metric, it is easier) 5,000 square kilometers? 10,000? Look at a scaled map and make your best guess. Assume that if all of the water in this area were condensed into a single layer, you would have 3 centimeters of water, not a lot. Calculate the volume and mass of this water. Calculate the number of calories needed to heat the water one degree C. Calculate the number of Joules. I’ll even let you take 12 hours to heat up the water. How many watts will this take? Look up the annual electrical generating capacity of a country of your choice. Divide by 365 and again by 2 and you will have the generating capacity for the same time frame. What is the relationship between the two?

If you can do this, then I will debate this further with you.

One other thing to consider. Radar systems operate using various microwave frequencies. If some one is using microwaves to heat up the water and “biological material,” to the extent needed to heat up the atmosphere, wouldn’t that play hell with radar systems already currently in use for ATC, weather, scientific, and military use?





top topics
 
0

log in

join