US Navy Responsible For Earthquakes, page 5

reply to post by WizardOfId

---

WizardOfId,

Agreed, to some extent. However, I am going to disagree with you about this theory being disinfo and the foam or o-ring being correct. I have personally researched and seen the facts, figures, and other information that leads me to my believe on the subject of the space shuttle disasters. Critical thinking (not your eyes it seems) is what has lead me to my conclusion that the "foam" or "o-rings" is the true disinfo (to be taken as "perceived reality" by the masses) and that technologies and a coming nuclear attack on Los Angeles unbeknownst to most were the real causes. Thus I do not blame the US government for the "disaster" but I do get riled-up when we are not told the truth, perpetuating the myth, "You can't handle the truth." Once us CT'ers acknowledge the existence of disinfo being out there for us to "bite on it, take it up and trumpet it", we must then acknowledge that the actual truth is out there too and that only critical thinking and logical reasoning will be able to deciepher the two.

You said "An aside: Your reference to haarp activity when shuttle launched. You should expect haarp, and/or other antennas to be operating. One of the uses for the array, and others, really IS for vastly improved satellite communications. That such used for a range of other things does not negate use for this purpose."

Okay? I am aware and (IMO) understanding of HAARP's ultra-low frequency capabilities in communications with deep sea submarines. (thus the NAVY involvement in the project) However, I haven't read documentation, heard previous arguments or seen any supporting data that HAARP somehow "vastly improves satellite communications." Would you care to share how you believe this to be the case?

Back to the space shuttle topic. I was talking about the re-entry and landing, not about launch. If I remember correctly, Columbia was in orbit at the ISS for about 1 1/2 months on that mission. HAARP was turned on at about 5:30AM and turned off at about 9:00AM during re-entry and landing. Duration was only during approach and re-entry as I have explained (no HAARP transmissions prior to 5:30AM 3/1/03 for over two weeks AND no HAARP transmissions post 9:00AM 3/1/03 for another 2 week period) If we could look into the electrical component debris from Columbia we would see EM damage across all hardware that was caused by HAARP. (well, the plasma shield of energized particles created by HAARP)

I guess we will have to agree to disagree about this, but let's not get all intellectual and claim that there are better things for each of us to research with our time (or "life force" to some extent) as you have said. As the OP claims (with recent earthquakes, Malaysian tsunami, and 9/11) HAARP may have more to do with the seemingly "natural disasters" than anybody (that has a clue) would care to acknowledge.

reply to post by danman23

---

Is it just me, or am I reading the date wrong? Columbia blew up on reentry on February 1, 2003. I'm getting a date of January 3, 2003 from the charts you posted, Dan.

reply to post by Icarus Rising

---

Sorry about that.. I haven't really been able to sleep for the past 3 days. I went to bed at about 10 am earlier and just tossed and turned till about 1 pm. For some reason I thought the shuttle went down on Jan 3rd? (I need to rest.) I must have been documenting a low scale earthquake or just a test. When I went to the real time of the Columbia disaster I found they had it turned up to 30 instead of 11 like I thought before. I didn't understand how they did it until after you pointed that out anyways. Now I do... They charged two layers of the atmosphere with extremely high power for about six hours. When the shuttle passed through it they exploded. Simple as that.. Here is a link to a guy who tries explain that the shuttles went down because of a "Rare Solar Shockwave" But you can obviously see that HAARP was on at an extremely high power before... so that "Rare Solar Shockwave" is actually HAARP's waves. He tries to explain but ends up asking "Did the shuttle inadvertently fly through a current sheet as it passed through the morning side of the ionosphere into daylight? Was this current sheet pushed by the Solar Wind Shockwave which arrived around the first signs of problems on the shuttle?" Well.. now he has his answers. "He goes on to say "Just as Columbia is over San Francisco within the ionosphere, entering sunlight, crossing a potential current sheet, while in a high right bank, with greater than normal vortexes created by the left double delta wing, as the solar wind shockwave hits the magnetosphere, an astronomer takes a picture of Columbia overhead and captures a luminous purple corkscrew object hitting the Shuttle." I think we all know what that "luminous purple corkscrew object" is from..

Anyways.. on to the graphs..





Again.. Save, Print and Share

Peace,
Dan

[edit on 24-4-2008 by danman23]

[edit on 24-4-2008 by danman23]

Hey Essan,

If you read all my posts you would see that I am a website designer, I started studying these graphs about 2 days ago. I didn't understand them properly until I found the explanation HAARP gives on their website Here and it was pointed out that I had the times lined up wrong. I could see that there was increased activity during the disasters but after I figured it out it all fell into place. Please look over the graphs I posted on page 4.

Under whom did you study? At which universities and research facilities?
I never went to college. I got expelled from highschool my senior year for talking back to teachers and being late... I did officially graduate from highschool though, I had enough credits when they kicked me out. It didn't really matter much to me because I already was running my own web design business.. business was alright for about 3 years.. then about 8 months ago I started working with a large company on a very nice salary and I work from home. (Still run my biz though and do side projects.)

How many other digisonde readings from the dates in question have you studied? How do that compare with the ones you have posted?
I have not compared them with other digisondes.. actually I can't find others. I you find some post them.

And, depending on your answer to those questions, why should we believe your unique interpretation of them?
Because the evidence speaks for it's self. Look at the beginning of the thread.. I was sure they were using HAARP even before I came across the data. Find someone who is trained on reading those graphs and you will know for sure.


[edit on 24-4-2008 by danman23]

They are using HAARP right now.. most likely just for weather modification. They are not letting it build up. It is at 14 which is strong but they are letting it go immediately. The black line going through the pink is a beam of plasma pushing the waves into the clouds above the US.



Check out the satellites.. Here



[edit on 24-4-2008 by danman23]

reply to post by skywatch

---

Welcome.. this is not hard to prove though.. this is data from their own equipment. It can and will be used against them in the court of law. I am pretty sure there are already people putting a case together with other evidence. One major fact is that the towers fell at a free fall speed.. that is not possible if the towers fell the way the commission said it did. They said that the jet fuel weakened the steel in the upper floors then the upper floors fell on the next lowest flow which then collapsed and hit the next.. so on and so forth. But if that were the case the towers would have takien longer than free fall speed due to floors crashing into each other.

Peace

reply to post by skywatch

---

They are not actually charging it up.. if they were you would see much more pink and green on the graphs. They are releasing the energy into the clouds above the USA immediately after they are released. (and probably a lil in Canada..) If they were charging it up.. I would start driving east. Keep track of the current graphs. If you see it start building up please post it. Here is the link
(They are turning it down now.)

reply to post by WizardOfId

---

Huh? Right. Even factual data is now disinfo, our feeble minds have been trained for this to happen!? I suppose I would agree to the extent that many claim every UFO photo or video to be a fake CGI hoax. However, when REAL proof does come along, they have been conditioned to say it is fake (almost automatically), so they will be wrong, no longer able to tell what is in fact is reality. At this point everything is fake, so why even consider the possibilities, right?

So tell me how do YOU deceipher fact from fiction in this world? And don't get into "critical thinking" like you eluded to in your previous post because many of us are already using our thought processes in a much sophisticated manner than your average sheeple....ie at least we are questioning a subject before judging the book by the cover!

Hey check this out. Nikola Tesla's earthquake machine. This guy started a thread suggesting that the towers were brought down by a Tesla device.

Originally posted by danman23
Hey Essan,

If you read all my posts you would see that I am a website designer, I started studying these graphs about 2 days ago

I think that answers my point In 2 days, with no training and no prior knowledge of the subject, you've become an expert in interpreting ionospheric activity data.

IMO you're looking at graphs of ionospheric activity above one point on the earth and drawing wholly unfounded conclusions about its effect on other points on the earth.

If you wish to verify your conclusions may I suggest comparing the graphs with activity over a number of days, and, indeed, on the same dates in previous years. Also compare with activity elsewhere in the world.

If you can then find something truely anomalous in the graphs you have been posting, you may have a point.

You may also care to explain to us - as alluded to in some of your other posts - how ionospheric activity above Alaska impacts on cloud cover over the contiguous USA - bearing in mind such activity is many many miles above the troposhpere as well as hundreds of miles aways from the areas allegedly affected.

For those interested, here's a couple of links to info that may prove useful:

www.wdc.rl.ac.uk...

www.wdc.rl.ac.uk...

Here, out of interest, is the latest reading from Chilton in the UK. Not as exciting as the graphs from Gakoma I'm afraid, but it's morning and as yet there's not a great deal of activity (it various due to time of day). I'll see if I can find a more interesting one later today to compare with those previously posted

Originally posted by danman23
Keep track of the current graphs. If you see it start building up please post it. Here is the link
(They are turning it down now.)

I bet you find that they normally 'charge it up' in the afternoon, local time, and that it turns down after dark

Sno-Trains..A short History..(with short video)
  Posted 14 days ago with 16 member flags

U.S. Military conducting massive training exercise in the streets of Los Angeles
  Posted 18 days ago with 7 member flags

Scientists to Add Spider Genes to Human Genome to Create ‘Bulletproof Skin’
  Posted 9 days ago with 5 member flags

Pictures: Civil War Sub H.L. Hunley Finally Revealed
  Posted 8 days ago with 5 member flags

Neuroscience the new face of warfare: experts
  Posted 4 days ago with 5 member flags

Congress Passes Bill That Opens US Skies To Unmanned Drones
  Posted 3 days ago with 4 member flags

The Latest in Terminator Tech
  Posted 3 days ago with 3 member flags

U.S. Navy to test 32 megajoule EM Railgun in the coming weeks
  Posted 2 days ago with 3 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: