US Navy Responsible For Earthquakes

page: 3
32
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 22 2008 @ 07:08 PM
link   
okay. danman makes some pretty profound claims here and has presented a substantial amount of evidence. personally, i agree with danman. i trust haarp about as much as senator mccarthy trusted the soviets, but that doesnt make haarp guilty of every crime they are accused of. again, i personally think they are behind danman's claims (and more), but as stated in a previous post, the burden of proof rests on the accuser. im new to ATS but the thing that attracted me to it in the first place was that its a safe place for people with "out there" theories to exchange ideas amongst peers. COOL HAND may be a disinfo, he may be lurking on the behalf of the powers that be, or he may just disagree with danman. but one fact remains certain: if you (danman) are onto something legit here, you should be a lot more careful about where you share this information. i agree: if you are absolutely correct with all your accusations, they need to come to light, and they need to be dealt with. but be a little more careful and thorough with your presentations as you never know who's watching. also, your haarp readings (and how they align with the disasters haarp supposedly caused) are compelling to say the least, but some people need more than that. yes, the graph does seem to line up with the disaster, but how does haarp do what it does. what is it about the energy it emits that causes these. HOW did haarp take down the towers? HOW did haarp cause the earthquakes? if this was a classic murder trial, you would certainly have enough to paint a villainous OJ simpson picture, but not enough for a conviction. i want to reiterate that i've been following haarp, and i fully agree with you, but i also understand why those who dont dont. i agree that this info is overwhelmingly important which is precisely why thoroughness on your part is so important. and to all the people who read this particular post (or any "out there" post for that matter) and immediatly say "psh", shame on you. that attitude is the EXACT reason why crimes of such proportions are so easy to get away with. take the classic suess story The Cat in the Hat for example. as the parents of the children in that story, what would you believe; that your kids ate too much sugar and ran amok, or that a 6 foot upright walking english speaking cat in a 2 foot top hat appeared out of nowhere and started causing trouble? the cat gets off scott free every time because of how outlandish the accusations against him sound. think about that next time somebody says something that sounds nutty. we should all still be skeptical so as not to fall for every outlandish claim, but, we should NEVER dismiss something immediately because of how it sounds. people living in WW2 germany knew about the holocaust the whole time but didnt believe it because of how absurd it sounded. lets not make that same mistake people




posted on Apr, 22 2008 @ 07:22 PM
link   
Dan, once again these graphs have a time issue, they are referred as UTC -9, this indicates that the times are roughly (grain of salt on this) AK time 2000 UTC/GMT, or 1100 AKT, which is 1400 CST, 1500 EST...the afternoon. Hours after the towers collapsed.

As for your claims...do not use the phrase "it's true", because automatically that comes to me as "hoax". It's not true because you say it is.

No cigar buddy, but keep trying.



posted on Apr, 22 2008 @ 07:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shugo
Dan, once again these graphs have a time issue, they are referred as UTC -9, this indicates that the times are roughly (grain of salt on this) AK time 2000 UTC/GMT, or 1100 AKT, which is 1400 CST, 1500 EST...the afternoon. Hours after the towers collapsed.

As for your claims...do not use the phrase "it's true", because automatically that comes to me as "hoax". It's not true because you say it is.

No cigar buddy, but keep trying.


You must have missed my post on the first page.. The graphs are in ADT..

"I actually found the graphs from a different website. But I found where you got that screen shot.. And guess what.. if you dig a little deeper you find that when the titles turned to links it cut off something very important..

"18 Apr 2008 06:00 UT (-22:00 ADT)" Ya... So.. heres the confirmation that I did know what I was doing and did line the times up right.
source
(I knew I was right)"

So.. to you Shugo.. Yes cigar buddy.. haha.

Oh man..

Just look at the graphs.. understand them and you will see.

Peace,
Dan



posted on Apr, 22 2008 @ 07:46 PM
link   
reply to post by alguymcgee
 


Great words Alguymcgee!
Honestly.. I feel a lot more comfortable with having this info public.. if these people are watching me.. They know it's too late. The cat's out of the bag. If I end up dead you know who did it and you have the evidence I dug up.. that's why I posted this immediately after I came across all this info.

I will try to put together something to explain exactly how HAARP works.. but like I said before I am just a website designer.. not a doomsday device designer.
Maybe you could help me.

The rabbit hole goes a lot deeper by the way..

Peace



[edit on 22-4-2008 by danman23]



posted on Apr, 22 2008 @ 08:06 PM
link   
I just hope this isn't the only place you are documenting your findings, Dan. Make copies and find people you can trust with your life to safeguard them. Don't take your own life so lightly, either. There is nothing more a dead hero can do. If you are right about all of this, and I do think you are on to something, play it smart and protect yourself and your research.



posted on Apr, 22 2008 @ 08:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Icarus Rising
 


It is in a few different peoples hands.. I would like everyone to have it on their computers just in case though. Actually can you guys print this.

Honestly though... (I never thought I would say this literally) I would die for my country and humanity.

Peace



posted on Apr, 22 2008 @ 08:34 PM
link   
Mmmm...I don't think so, they don't say on that graph that it's ADT. Most of the time if they're unmarked, they go UTC. If you want an example of that, go check out NOAA.



posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 02:39 AM
link   
Well if the US is testing an environmental Mega Weapon, I hope they screw it up & sink their whole Continent into the Ocean..lol

THen they won't be able to say, "Hey guys, look what we got, you belong to us now"...heh.

I say let em' go & hope they kill themselves for messin' with something they got no business messing with n the first place.



posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 02:41 AM
link   
I'm not sure if this is helpful with what you've got here, but last week I took some photos of the extensive amount of 'contrails' over Lansing, MI and posted them on ATS.


Here's the link to my thread, have a look at the pictures. This is not normal to me.

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 02:59 AM
link   
Hello People,

Part of haarp is about earth penetration, land, sea, ice.
A variety of purposes.

Causing specific effects is about finding appropriate frequency (-ies) and exploiting, just what frequency, playing of frequencies, brings about the resonance, vibration response, effect desired.

Utililization of both reflective and refractive particles in some chemtrail buildups is in effect for lensing.
Injection of particles higher still, higher than the lower layer closer to earth, means, in effect, two layers, with space in between.
Waves bounced along other layers that have been laid, to reach desired build up position between two layers. Both are reflective but one is less so. The charge is built up between these two layers. It exits, and can be focused, through the layer (this layer itself tweaked through splitting of equipment resource at one array or use of supplementary array-ies for purpose) that is less reflective. This can be used for earth penetrating effect or projection into space, depending upon which layer is the least reflective.

Someone mentioned haarp shooting down Columbia.
This is not true.
We know what happened.
Foam came from the bipod area of the external tank.
At velocity, damage to shuttle tile structure.
Burn-up on re-entry.

The bipod areas have been completely reworked.
The operational procedures in building the external tank have been revamped, and are levels more involved. It has been said that there are now Ten Layers Of Overkill in building the tank.

The original design of the shuttle was never meant to be in the physical proximity to the SRBs or the liquid fuel external tank that you now see it, have seen it.
Originally it was considerably smaller, and the choices of launch considered were:
a. riding on top of rocket.
b. riding underneath large high altitude plane for a modern take on the x-15 launches.

It was the Military (Air Force in lead) that mandated a larger payload, the large bay.

This meant a. and b. above had to be scrapped.
And a much more dangerous design settled on.

Having the shuttle Right Next to the Solid Rocket Boosters means that if anything goes wrong with those boosters, it is not riding it out on top, away from them underneath. The shuttle is right next to them.
The faulty O ring on one killed the Challenger crew.

It also means that if anything goes wrong with some of the liquid fuel (LH, LO) external tank structures, the shuttle is not riding it out on top. It is strapped in on the side, with the tank extending upward over the shuttle. The foam coming from the bipod area damaged the ship and killed the Columbia crew on re-entry.

As stated, MUCH more stringent check and balance measures are in effect post-Columbia in building the tank. Cameras are in place that were not there previously. The Shuttle crews are now trained for tile repair, and make spacewalks to specifically check for damages post-Columbia.

Space flight is a dangerous business. Everytime a shuttle fight goes up, fingers are crossed and breath held by many. Ditto for re-entry.

Everybody in the field knows, that no matter how you plan, and how careful everyone tries to be, a catastrophe is always a very real possibility.

Especially with the compromise design that was not original intention.

An aside... The U.S. does not have wiz-bang space/saucer technology, as in the reverse-engineered from crashed et/ed ships that so many speculate on. Wishes it did. It would be much less trouble and bother than the nuts and bolts and dangers of its current program. The next one, the Orion/Constellation, is a step back in some ways. The capsule is only 16 feet in diameter.
The U.S. DOES have lighter than air platforms, particle drive (as in no jet noise), that can stay aloft for extended time periods. Yes, they are black. Yes, they are triangular. They are equipped to monitor a very wide swath of the electromagnetic spectrum. Including your very own personal bio-electric-magnetic signature.

[edit on 23-4-2008 by WizardOfId]



posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 07:52 AM
link   
reply to post by danman23
 


be very carefull dude, remember what happened to Dan Eden / Gary Vey ???

put it this way.......same subject same outcome !!
u2u me for more details.

thanks

snoopyuk



posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 08:50 AM
link   
Ok... three pages in and the OP is still denying the issues with his theory pointed out on page one. This is starting to smell like a deliberate hoax to me.

This information has been posted several times, but it seems like nobody bothers to read links and everything has to be in pictures or it doesn't exist. Once again, so there's no way to avoid reading the linked references.

1. The graphs are not HAARP generated. They are Ionograms made by a device called a Digisonde, which works something like a doppler radar and maps the naturally occurring charged particles in the upper atmosphere. There is a link to the University of Mass. Digisonde information page RIGHT THERE on the HAARP webpage.



2. It clearly shows that the Y Axis of the graph is the Range (90-650km) not 'Megahertz' as the OP claims. The X Axis of the graph is the Sounding Frequency not 'Height in thousands of Kilometers'.





3. The graphs from the Digisonde database are labeled in UTC time. This has been pointed out several times but the OP refuses to acknowledge it and claims it's ADT. The Earthquake occurred at 04:37 Local Time (CDT). That's 01:37 ADT, and 09:37 UTC. The OP's graphs don't correspond to ANY of these times.






Look, I'm not trying to be a prig. You might have a good theory if you can find the HAARP output logs that match the event times, but this is just atmospheric monitoring data and we don't even know if HAARP was switched on at the time.

If you just ignore any contradictory information that other people post here, you end up shooting your own theory full of holes and people will doubt there's any merit in it at all. If you take the time to go back over your graphs, check your times, compare the results to other Digisonde or Ionosonde monitoring stations, and STILL have something that supports your theory, I know everyone will be more inclined to believe you.



posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 10:51 AM
link   
Part of the problem with the original poster's effort, IS in the area of attention to details.

The filter has to be on.

Not to the point of straining a gnat to swallow a camel.
But to basics.

The article referencing Aum S., and unquestioned acceptance that Prime Argus a precursor to haarp, a case in point.
Prime Argus was limited in scope, direction, and utilized necessarily a restricted means for ends.
Haarp is an entirely different creature, with a differing means for wide variety of utilizations that is much grander.
The interests projected and realized by movers in PA are but a compartment in something much more comprehensive, which is again, in haarp, accomplished by different means.

The difference could have been seen by engaging critical thinking and a net examination of principles involved in documents available.

Such distinctions ARE critical. Someone who endeavors to explore needs to examine carefully. If a case is to be made, it needs to be done without glaring insults to those who are more careful. The intricate details may never be accessible other than from the inside. But it is imperative to have the outsider presentation as clean, as logical, as possible.

In an age of increased specialization, and without direct communication with people who are directly knowledgeable, as in working experiential knowledge, in fields in question, most of us are in compromised positions in coming to conclusions about What Is Going On.

That means attention to the details that are present, available, needs to be keen.

As to the, "dramatics," i.e., risking death, might disappear, and such, voiced by both OP and some responders:
There is so much disinfo floated that by the time anything resembling a handle on something by anything starting to resemble a substantial number of agreeing individuals starts to take shape, ThePowersThatBe are well into next phase(-s).
This is particularly telling with regard to Societal Control.
Meaning, an individual with substantial element of truth will likely him/her self be an agent, unwitting, of disinfo due to pollution of mind mechanics, faulty info blended with accurate data.
Not a threat.


[edit on 23-4-2008 by WizardOfId]



posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 01:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Ironclad
 


Ya.. great.. but do you really want millions of people to die too?



posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 01:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Impreza
 


Yes.. that is great that you documented that. Thank you for bring it to my attention.



posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 01:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by mythatsabigprobe
Ok... three pages in and the OP is still denying the issues with his theory pointed out on page one. This is starting to smell like a deliberate hoax to me.


I am not trying to fool anyone. I am just a 22 year old guy trying to disclose info to the public. Forget about the graphs for a moment.. I had a very strong case before I even posted the graphs. I will admit that this is over my head. I am just a website designer... I should have posted the graphs and asked someone more knowledgeable to interpret it for me... but I went for it. I need to sit down and research this all a lot more but I just put the info out there as fast as I could just in case I was being monitored. Since you know what is going on can you help me? Or anyone else.. I have a job and a life that needs my attention as well.



Look, I'm not trying to be a prig. You might have a good theory if you can find the HAARP output logs that match the event times, but this is just atmospheric monitoring data and we don't even know if HAARP was switched on at the time.

If you just ignore any contradictory information that other people post here, you end up shooting your own theory full of holes and people will doubt there's any merit in it at all. If you take the time to go back over your graphs, check your times, compare the results to other Digisonde or Ionosonde monitoring stations, and STILL have something that supports your theory, I know everyone will be more inclined to believe you.


I know your not trying to be a "prig" you are being very rational. Can you and other people help me with putting all the data together?

By the way.. I wasn't using that site to get the graphs.. I was using this site.

Peace



posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 01:57 PM
link   
They're the same graphs though, it doesn't matter where you got them from, the times on the charts are still UTC. I really do think you have a good theory, but you're not presenting this good at all.

Times say UTC to me.
I know no government facility, or education facility stamps it's charts in ADT, CDT, EDT, or whatever without noting it. They're always UTC, why...to share with other people elsewhere, it's a globally accepted time method.

You're a webdesigner, you should know this. What are UNIX timestamps based off of? UTC. What are computers always set to when you turn them on by default? 0, or...UTC. That's why it's called "0", central time is -6, and Japan is +11 (I believe it's 11), because we're offset of the UTC.



posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 01:58 PM
link   
Wow.. ya, I could have just left my theory at the "persisting contrails" and the satellite imagery.. but I felt that I had to bring more info to the table ASAP. I feel that there is a good chance that the recent earthquake was a test to see how much power they have to use to wipe out the desired amount of states which would be a national emergency which would allow for martial law to be called. I really really really don't want this to be the case. But the rotating weather system sitting over the epicenter for hours is very very suspicious and should be looked into a lot more.

Heres a question for a meteorologist.. Is that a normal occurrence? Can it be explained with natural reasons?

Thanks for your wise words Wizard.

Peace


[edit on 23-4-2008 by danman23]



posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 02:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shugo
They're the same graphs though, it doesn't matter where you got them from, the times on the charts are still UTC. I really do think you have a good theory, but you're not presenting this good at all.

Times say UTC to me.
I know no government facility, or education facility stamps it's charts in ADT, CDT, EDT, or whatever without noting it. They're always UTC, why...to share with other people elsewhere, it's a globally accepted time method.

You're a webdesigner, you should know this. What are UNIX timestamps based off of? UTC. What are computers always set to when you turn them on by default? 0, or...UTC. That's why it's called "0", central time is -6, and Japan is +11 (I believe it's 11), because we're offset of the UTC.


I was just showing you the graphs from September 2001 that aren't accessible from links on the site.

Since you think this is a good theory ya wanna help me a little then? Like line the times up to what you think they should be and see if maybe what I presented before was actually a different earthquake they cause somewhere else.. or even find out that they are fudging the timezones on purpose so that people can't line them up with real time.

Peace



posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 02:09 PM
link   
reply to post by danman23
 


It's very common.
It depends if there's a front associated with it, if the boundary has stalled.
If there's high pressure locking it in place, it could also just be a very slow moving system.

It isn't uncommon for Low Pressure Centers to stay over a place for a while. There was a Tropical Storm which was in the Gulf, and Atlantic, Allison I believe. Hurricanes in true are very powerful low pressure systems. When Allison was dropped to a tropical depression (low pressure center), it hung around the coast for days and days and days.

So yes, it's not always the case, but it's not uncommon or out of the ordinary.





new topics

top topics



 
32
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join