HAARP Story Changes...

page: 2
5
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 24 2007 @ 02:43 PM
link   

"Transmitting Tesla Tower and Laboratory built in 1901-1905 by Stanford White, famous architect and Tesla's friend. Located in Wardenclyffe, Long Island. This was to be the first broadcasting system in the world. Tesla also wanted to transmit electricity from this Tower to the whole globe without wires using the Ionosphere. The source of the transmitted electricity was to be the Niagara Falls power plant."

aka Wardenclyffe Tower.
some good info regarding the tower:
tower
tower2

There ya go



You should also understand that Wardenclyffe tower is Not the "death ray"
completely different project.

[edit on 24-4-2007 by WhiteWash]




posted on Apr, 24 2007 @ 02:51 PM
link   
I realize that it's different projects. But the death ray had a similar tower, but with an emitter on it, in the drawings with the 1930s interview about it. It would probably have been similar, in that both were emitting huge amounts of power. But either way, if he was able to do that much with the power transmission tower, with just a few hundred kilowatts, then HAARP should be able to do much more, with a smaller emitter by now. Even if they didn't INITIALLY understand him, they should have come up with ways to make the emitter smaller by now. HAARP has been up there for quite awhile now, and the way technology has advanced in the 20th century, SOMEONE should have come up with something smaller than that giant array by now.



posted on Apr, 24 2007 @ 02:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
If they were able to get this result from simply several hundred kilowatts of power, and a small tower, then I would think that somehow HAARP would STILL be much smaller than it really is, if it's some death ray.



Then is it not creepy that HAARP is so large when less energy could be used? It's like saying N. Korea would only need a hundred square foot nuclear plant to destroy Washington D.C. but recent evidence supports they have a 100,000 square foot nuclear facility...



posted on Apr, 24 2007 @ 02:56 PM
link   
Except that yet again we come back to "What does HAARP do?" If it's a particle beam then yes, however, if it's an experiment in communications (which I've heard), or any of the other explanations for it then no, it's probably necessary. Personally, I think that HAARP has a perfectly harmless explanation, and that since it's a classified project people automatically assume the worst.



posted on Apr, 24 2007 @ 03:05 PM
link   
Lmao, when I read this stuff about the tower with an emitter array that shoots a ''beam'' it really reminds me of the Excalibur "Fictional superweapon" from the ace combat games.



posted on Apr, 24 2007 @ 03:07 PM
link   
Doesn't HAARP recieve its power from that Alaskin Pipeline? Even if all hell broke loose in the greater 48 states couldnt the seculded compound still function?


HAARP's probably a HVT, especially if other countries know something more about its capabilities.




How many ATSers can vouch for me that original HAARP mission statements did not include DARPA implications?






Tying thing to the section I put this in...


Is it not disinfo if in 1993 HAARPs mission statement said one thing while in 2007 it is worded by DARPA that HAARP has always had advanced research goals developed for military defense purposes?




It makes me wonder that if after a serious American or Global issue will vast collections of data and information be rewritten and passed off as the original work?



posted on Apr, 24 2007 @ 03:09 PM
link   
You may be interested in the following:
source

This will help you to understand.



posted on Apr, 24 2007 @ 03:12 PM
link   
As I said earlier, I've ALWAYS heard that HAARP was a military/civilian classified project. I've never read the different mission statements, but everyone that I've seen mention it have always implied or stated it was military.

As for getting its power, how would it get power from an oil pipeline?

It has its own diesel generators that provide power.


Prior to the beginning of the HAARP program, the Gakona site was planned by the Air Force, to be an Over The Horizon Backscatter (OTH-B) radar installation. Under that program, a large, 21,000 square foot building (shown in the photo to the left) was constructed to house the prime power producing equipment for the facility. The main OTH-B power source was to be a large coal-fired steam generator with six large diesel generators serving as a backup power source. At the termination of the OTH-B program, the steam generation equipment was completely removed from the site; the diesel generators were provided to the HAARP program for use in generating the power required to operate the HF transmitter system that will be used to conduct active ionospheric research at the facility.

When the facility is completed and all six of the diesel generators are installed in the power plant building, there will be sufficient generation capacity on-site to produce all of the prime power needed to operate the HF transmitter system as well as the Incoherent Scatter Radar (ISR).

www.haarp.alaska.edu...



posted on Apr, 24 2007 @ 03:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by WhiteWash
You may be interested in the following:
source

This will help you to understand.


Until they declassify HAARP this is all speculation, and ideas. There are a lot "has potential" and "might" and "could" in there. There are a lot of people that seem to THINK they know what HAARP does, but unless it's declassified we won't KNOW for sure what it really does. You would think that if it disrupts huge areas of communications, ships at sea would notice, and the USGS would notice more earthquakes, etc.



posted on Apr, 24 2007 @ 03:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Except that yet again we come back to "What does HAARP do?" If it's a particle beam then yes, however, if it's an experiment in communications (which I've heard), or any of the other explanations for it then no, it's probably necessary. Personally, I think that HAARP has a perfectly harmless explanation, and that since it's a classified project people automatically assume the worst.



I agree. We are just speculating on HAARPs potential and possible future agenda. With this said I hope to see this thread allow ATS members to collectively dig and work out theories on this whole HAARP situation. This is probably a lost cause but maybe we can get this on the home page allowing much more vast wealth of information exchange.



Regardless, I still ask, that if in 1993 one thing was said then in 2007 the contradiction to this was now the accepted truth, what are the implications of proper government citation and documentation regarding fact?



posted on Apr, 24 2007 @ 03:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58

As for getting its power, how would it get power from an oil pipeline?

It has its own diesel generators that provide power.



Could ARCO and the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System be of any signifigance?


Interestingly enough, a subsidiary of ARCO called APTI (ARCO Power Technologies, Inc.) holds a patent (#4,686,605) which matches the HAARP proposal dealing with transmitting extremely large amounts of RF energy into the ionosphere.

...

In a press release by the USAF dated Nov. 3, 1993, the military announced that the prime contractor on the HAARP project was ARCO Power Technologies, Inc. and that the first phase of the program was already underway to develop and test a low-power high-frequency (2.8-10.0 MHz) prototype transmitter array.

A fact sheet issued by the Office of Naval Research and the Phillips Laboratory about HAARP (Nov. 4, 1993) mentioned (among other things):

"Potential applications of the HAARP research include developing DoD technology for detecting cruise missiles and aircraft and for communicating with submarines. Although HAARP is being managed by the AF and Navy, it is purely a scientific research facility [yeah, right -d4]...

www.umf.net...


[edit on 24-4-2007 by Watchful1]

[edit on 24-4-2007 by Watchful1]



posted on Apr, 24 2007 @ 03:31 PM
link   
I'm still looking, but in 1997 it was already being stated that HAARP was a military research project.


A serious review of HAARP is presented. On the surface, HAARP appears to be a nice military "scientific endeavor aimed at studying the properties and behavior of the ionosphere".

www.padrak.com...

Just found statements from 1990 and 1993 that show it was military.


A November 1993 "HAARP Fact Sheet" released to the public by the Office of Naval Research (ONR) stated that the Department of Defense (DoD)-backed project would "enhance present civilian capabilities" in communications and "provide significant scientific advancements." However, while previous DoD experiments with smaller high frequency (HF) heaters in Puerto Rico, Norway and Alaska were conducted to "gain [a] better understanding" of the ionosphere, internal HAARP documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) reveal that the project's goal is to "perturb" the ionosphere with extremely powerful beams of energy and study "how it responds to the disturbance and how it ultimately recovers...."

The public fact sheet describes HAARP as "purely a scientific research facility which represents no threat to potential adversaries and would therefore have no value as a military target." However, while ionospheric experiments at the government's Puerto Rico transmitter site are managed by the civilian National Science Foundation, the Journal has learned that proposals for experiments on HAARP are to be routed through the Pentagon's Office of Naval Research.

A February 1990 Air Force-Navy _/b] acquired by the Journal lists only military experiments for the HAARP project, including: "Generation of ionospheric lenses to focus large amounts of HF energy at high altitudes... providing a means for triggering ionospheric processes that potentially could be exploited for DoD purposes...; Generation of ionization layers below 90 km [56 miles] to provide radio wave reflectors ("mirrors") which can be exploited for long range, over-the-horizon, HF/VHF/UHF surveillance purposes, including the detection of cruise missiles and other low observables." The document concluded that "the potential for significantly altering regions of the ionosphere at relatively great distances (1000 km or more ) [621 miles] from a heater is very desirable" from a military perspective.

www.geocities.com...

So what really changed?



posted on Apr, 24 2007 @ 03:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Watchful1
Could ARCO and the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System be of any signifigance?


Interestingly enough, a subsidiary of ARCO called APTI (ARCO Power Technologies, Inc.) holds a patent (#4,686,605) which matches the HAARP proposal dealing with transmitting extremely large amounts of RF energy into the ionosphere.
www.umf.net...
[edit on 24-4-2007 by Watchful1]


Except the oil pumped through the pipeline is unrefined oil. IIRC you have to put some additives into the oil before you can use it in something like a diesel generator. You can't just pull it out of the ground and them pump it into a generator.



posted on Apr, 24 2007 @ 03:33 PM
link   
Examine some points:


Is HAARP a classified project?
HAARP is not classified. There are no classified documents pertaining to HAARP. The Environmental Impact Process (EIP) documents have always been, are now, and will always be completely descriptive of the program in its entirety. The EIP documents are a matter of public record.

source

Now:
remember what i said in a previous post?:

"What set Tesla's proposal apart from the usual run of fantasy "death rays" was a unique vacuum chamber with one end open to the atmosphere. Tesla devised a unique vacuum seal by directing a high-velocity air stream at the tip of his gun to maintain "high vacua." The necessary pumping action would be accomplished with a large Tesla turbine."

"Tesla also contemplated peacetime applications for his particle beam, one being to transmit power without wires over long distances. Another radical notion he proposed was to heat up portions of the upper atmosphere to light the sky at night — a man-made aurora borealis."


examine from haarp website:

Electromagnetic interactions only occur in the near-vacuum of the rarefied region above about 70 km known as the ionosphere.


and:

HAARP is a scientific endeavor aimed at studying the properties and behavior of the ionosphere, with particular emphasis on being able to understand and use it to enhance communications and surveillance systems for both civilian and defense purposes.

The HAARP program is committed to developing a world class ionospheric research facility consisting of:

* The ionospheric research instrument (IRI), a high power transmitter facility operating in the HF frequency range. The IRI will be used to temporarily excite a limited area of the ionosphere for scientific study.
* A sophisticated suite of Scientific (or "diagnostic") instruments that will be used to observe the physical processes that occur in the excited region.



posted on Apr, 24 2007 @ 03:40 PM
link   
From your source:


HAARP is not designed to be an operational system for military purposes. The HAARP specifications were developed by a consortium of universities to meet the requirements for a world-class research facility and an expanded group of universities are playing a major role in the design of future research efforts.

The HAARP facility will be used for basic and applied research related to the study of the Earth's ionosphere. Because the DoD operates numerous communication and navigation systems whose signals either depend on reflection from the ionosphere or must pass through the ionosphere to satellites, there is obvious DoD interest in understanding the ionosphere's effect on these systems to improve their reliability and performance. Greater understanding of the physics of the ionosphere are expected to result in improvements to commercial applications, such as GPS and LEO communication satellites whose performance is often significantly affected by random ionospheric variations.

Administratively, HAARP is restricted to operate only on a "not-to-interfere-basis" (NIB) by the NTIA and is categorized as an experimental station (XR) in the NTIA spectrum certification document.

www.haarp.alaska.edu...

I'd say a death ray is most DEFINITELY a military application, wouldn't you?



posted on Apr, 24 2007 @ 03:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
I'm still looking, but in 1997 it was already being stated that HAARP was a military research project.


A serious review of HAARP is presented. On the surface, HAARP appears to be a nice military "scientific endeavor aimed at studying the properties and behavior of the ionosphere".

www.padrak.com...

Just found statements from 1990 and 1993 that show it was military.


A November 1993 "HAARP Fact Sheet" released to the public by the Office of Naval Research (ONR) stated that the Department of Defense (DoD)-backed project would "enhance present civilian capabilities" in communications and "provide significant scientific advancements."

The public fact sheet describes HAARP as "purely a scientific research facility which represents no threat to potential adversaries and would therefore have no value as a military target." However, while ionospheric experiments at the government's Puerto Rico transmitter site are managed by the civilian National Science Foundation, the Journal has learned that proposals for experiments on HAARP are to be routed through the Pentagon's Office of Naval Research.


www.geocities.com...

So what really changed?



That it was a "purely a scientific research facility which represents no threat to potential adversaries and would therefore have no value as a military target." but the 2007 DARPA TTO Overview on HAARP says

DARPA established an MOA with the Air Force and Navy for this program in November 2002. The HAARP technology is transitioning to the Air Force and Navy in FY 2006.



posted on Apr, 24 2007 @ 03:43 PM
link   
Zaphod58:
Do you think they would Admit the military applications?
Come now.
There is plenty of evidence. You just choose not to see it.



posted on Apr, 24 2007 @ 03:48 PM
link   
Well now wait. Now we're picking and choosing what to believe from that page? Sorry, but you can't cite a source and say "I believe this part of it, but I'm not going to believe this one." Either a source is credible or it's not. And if there IS a military application going on, that shoots your source page right out the window, because OBVIOUSLY it's going to be classified. Despite what your page showed about there not being any classified documents about HAARP.



posted on Apr, 24 2007 @ 03:52 PM
link   
Sorry, no story changed. It was always Air Force/Navy/University of Alaska.



posted on Apr, 24 2007 @ 03:52 PM
link   
That is actually the point I am attempting to make.
Obviously the Haarp website is going to be filled with what they want you to believe. My point is that any military applications it has will not be talked about in haarp's official information. The evidence that haarp is comprised of technology derived from Tesla's work is evident for all to see. Although I realize your hobby is to kill threads and derail theories, Please do not put words or assumptions into my mouth.





new topics
top topics
 
5
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join