Definition of Transitor A slow-moving major planet whose lingering aspect to a birth planet produces a displacement of equilibrium, which is then activated by an additional aspect from a Culminator, a faster-moving body such as the Sun or Moon, to the same or another planet, thereby precipitating the externalization. Got this from google page 1..

Don't poo all over endrna

[edit on 17-8-2007 by depth om]

Originally posted by clay2 baraka
Cramer, a Canadian, was freer to speculate on HAARP's uses, and said he believes its primary purpose is defensive. Specifically, he noted that HAARP was capable of disabling ballistic missiles and it's also used for communications with submarines and ground penetrating radar.

Cramer:
1) missiles: not HAARP, he's quoting from Eastlund, but HAARP isn't the machine in Eastlund - wrong
2) subs: correct - it is a backup to the VLF stations, right
3) GPR: not HAARP, not enough power, quoting from Begich, wrong

Resnick pointed out that the project has beneficial non-military uses, such as when ELF (electromagnetic fields) were shown to promote plant growth and bee productivity.

The small amount of ELF you can induce with HAARP (it won't radiate it) is meaningless in terms of plant growth.

Patents allude to HAARP being able create a nuclear explosion without radiation, such as by detonating a blimp filled with methane, he continued.

Totally incorrect. He's getting all his data from Begich's crap book.

Begich was wrong when he cited this patent. It has bupkis to do with HAARP. Begich just dumped out a list of APTI patents and attributed all the more lurid sounding ones to HAARP.

He also suggested that HAARP is working in tandem with and/or a cover story for up to two other similar or more powerful arrays in Alaska.

He got this little gem from another book which is pure fiction, we hacked this one to death last month on another thread.

If HAARP is such a benign program, why is much of the work being done by the program classified (not to mention sponsored by the USAF)?

You forgot the NRL. Because it has military implications. That doesn't mean it isn't benign, at least as far as you're concerned. You don't want your adversaries knowing your capabilities. Thus, it's classified.

edit:
At any rate, this isn't a HAARP thread, really, and endrna might re-emerge. Maybe he's gotten some help by now. There's another HAARP thread with the analysis of that other book that's a lot more appropriate, if you want I'll go dig it up and post the link.


[edit on 18-8-2007 by Tom Bedlam]

Here we go again Tom, now you say that this HAARP system could put holes in our atmosphere but is not powerful to grow a plant? Why do botanists use 100watt UV bulbs?

HAARP is not strong enough to cause the honey bees to die off? But they say it's the cell phones? right.

I don't know Tom, I really don't. I used to sleep walk and I would walk outside and stare at the moon. I always worked nightshifts etc, and always wondered what was going on in that moon. Look at the symbols, look at them all.

Originally posted by StreetCorner Philosopher
Here we go again Tom, now you say that this HAARP system could put holes in our atmosphere but is not powerful to grow a plant? Why do botanists use 100watt UV bulbs?

First off, as far as "holes in the ionosphere" comment, I didn't say it, Cramer did, and he's not exactly accurate most of the time. The array can't make a hole. It could take advantage of one if it were present, it has enough power to do a moonbounce, but the frequencies it can emit won't pass through the ionosphere.

The statement above was that someone had published a paper showing some ELF influence on plants, which I doubt even coming from Resnick, but didn't take the time to get a copy and read, because the total output ELF output power that the array can induce is quite low. Less than, say, 20 Watts total. So, no, it can't make the daisies grow, sorry to say. I suspect that the writer misquoted Resnick and what was said was that in experiments ELF was shown to have this effect, and the C2C author put HAARP in Resnick's mouth, so to speak.

Botanists use 100W UV bulbs because they emit light that corresponds to an absorption peak in one of the chlorophylls, so plants like it. UV and ELF are quite far apart. Seeing that the plant doesn't have a chloroplast 20 miles across, ELF isn't going to be a primary growth wavelength for it. Also, since it doesn't have chloroplasts several meters across, the array's direct output isn't going to work for it either. Finally, the total power output of the array is something like 3.6MW, which would hardly be sufficient for all the plants in thw world.

HAARP is not strong enough to cause the honey bees to die off? But they say it's the cell phones? right.

No, it isn't. And the cell phone thing - that was denied by the people who wrote the paper you are probably referring to. It wasn't a cell phone anyway.


[edit on 4-9-2007 by Tom Bedlam]

[edit on 4-9-2007 by Tom Bedlam]

Originally posted by StreetCorner Philosopher

I don't know Tom, I really don't. I used to sleep walk and I would walk outside and stare at the moon. I always worked nightshifts etc, and always wondered what was going on in that moon. Look at the symbols, look at them all.

What a neat comment! I think that explains everything.

Good luck, Tom.

Yeah, well, I wasn't going to say it.

You should have seen the other thread.

I really thought his closing comment, while a trifle odd, was nicely phrased, so I gave it a +1 for style and let it go.