Crop Circle - New one is a beauty! 24th July 2009

Originally posted by warpath1984
reply to post by jfj123

 

why would the us military bomb one of their own ships and simply blame it on the vietnamese? obviously for ulterior motives.

And just how would they do it?

1. Please show how microwaves can be used in this manner.
2. Please show that the US military has this capability.
3. Please show that the US has a satellite armed with said technology.

If these questions can't be answered to any degree of certainty, then their COMPLETELY BASELESS GUESSES.

There is no reason to continue discussing microwaves being used by the US military to create crop circles unless we're going to discuss the following alternative hypothesis:
Giant, Invisible, Flying, Purple Wombats from planet Xenu are creating the crop circles using their electromagnetic/microwave eye beams.

Both hypothesis' are just as reasonable so will we be discussing both ?

Originally posted by warpath1984
reply to post by jfj123

 

i dont have to ive already done it. if you are truly seeking the truth why dont you do it and try and prove me wrong? i will however make a video soon on youtube so that many of you crop circle fans can hear a radio interview speaking about dod using microwaves. ill do that later when i have the time.

[edit on 2-8-2009 by warpath1984]

Since you've already done it and feel so strongly, why not post the info? I mean you said you already have all the info right? That's what you said above so if you won't post it now, why should we believe anything you say?

And why didn't you answer the other questions I posted?

Originally posted by warpath1984


1. Why would the US military make crop circles in England?
probably for the same reason theyve made crop circles in other countries.


2. How can a microwave weapon be used to create a crop circle?
point and shoot and draw.

3. Do you honestly believe this?
not only do i believe it, i know it.

KNOWING is a very strong word. This indicates the following:
1. You have an understanding of the technology needed to "draw" crop circles. Since you do, describe it in detail. Please feel free to post technical information. I won't have a problem understanding it. A schematic would be appreciated.
2. You must also KNOW that the US military has this technology. Please post that information.
3. You must also KNOW that this technology can be used as you've described. Please post this information including examples.
4. You must also KNOW that this technology has been installed in a space based operations platform. Please post this information as well. A project name/number would be greatly appreciated.

This should not be a problem for someone who KNOW'S all this info.
When will you be able to post this information?
I'll follow up a little later if you forget to post or miss my post. I wouldn't want your vast knowledge regarding this subject to get overlooked in our haste.
Thanks.

reply to post by warpath1984

What you mean is after the launching of the rocket,after the building of the launchpad after the committees have approved and budgeted said operation,one person actually pressed an alleged button,setting in motion a whole process probably employing hundreds if not thousands of people,all for what exactly?Pretty glyphs.With a message? or a movie? Mavbe some religious faction within dod is prepping us for their holographic second coming.These are signs and wonders.That's what all the missing money is being squandered on,now I get it...

reply to post by jfj123

1. Please show how microwaves can be used in this manner.
2. Please show that the US military has this capability.
3. Please show that the US has a satellite armed with said technology.

If these questions can't be answered to any degree of certainty, then their COMPLETELY BASELESS GUESSES.

There is no reason to continue discussing microwaves being used by the US military to create crop circles unless we're going to discuss the following alternative hypothesis:
Giant, Invisible, Flying, Purple Wombats from planet Xenu are creating the crop circles using their electromagnetic/microwave eye beams.

Both hypothesis' are just as reasonable so will we be discussing both ?

I'm finding it very interesting how you manage to deride and dispute the majority of posts that apparently don't fit in with your personal notion of how cc's are created. The message I'm getting (and I'm sure others are too) is that you've set yourself up as a self-proclaimed debunker and are unwilling to concede that some of these other posts may in fact, contain some measure of validity ... especially if unusual technology is mentioned or implied. Quite a narrow minded and provincial attitude, indeed.

Anyway, for a number of years I've watched the cc debate go round in circles as the two major cc creation camps (aliens OR rope & plank brigade) attempt to ram their respective beliefs down the throats of the opposition camp.
Unfortunately though, neither side has managed to produce anything even close to conclusive and unassailable proof that their particular brand of cc theory is THE correct one.

The "aliens did it" hypothesis is so patently illogical and ridiculous that it makes one wonder how any rational minded individual could even begin to consider that as the source of cc's. Coupled with the FACT that there is ZERO corroborating or even circumstantial evidence reduces the probability of alien involvement down to extremely low values.

The same goes for the other major cited alternative, namely creation by "rope & plank" bearing amateurs stumbling around dark fields. It's so easy to sit back in the comfort of your armchair and state how easy it surely must be ... simply draw your design onto paper then go find a convenient field of wheat and within a few short hours and with hardly much effort (because apparently it's so easy), transfer the paper design onto a few 100 square meters of ground and end up with the most complex and creative design.
And yet, how many that adhere to this particular version of cc creation have even bothered to take a few minutes to work out the sort of logistics that come into play and would need to be addressed and overcome once you're standing in the midst of a wheat field that stretches as far as you can see ... which in actuality wouldn't be very far in the dark. Issues such as communications between members; lack of visibility (both in the distance and on the immediate ground beneath the wheat); site surveying and plotting of the design; continual monitoring of every section of the work in progress; immediate error detection and correction; effective time management tracking; keeping collateral wheat damage to zero or minimal levels; and many, many other logistical issues that would be inevitable with a project on this scale.
Get it out of your heads that this version of cc creation is trivial for a few people to accomplish in a very short space of time ... this is a MAJOR undertaking and project and requires MAJOR effort .. and the level of difficulty and associated logistics only increases with the complexity of the design.

So, if we're having these sort of monumental difficulties with both the "alien" and the "rope & board" versions, perhaps it's time to step back and reappraise the situation and attempt to come up with another alternative hypothesis ... and this time based on what IS possible and what IS achievable based on abilities and technologies that are currently KNOWN to be available OR that are KNOWN to be under research and development. In other words, technology that is considered FEASIBLE by todays standards and science and MAY be in use, whether publically disclosed or not.

A few posters (myself included) have suggested that a realistic and possible scenario is to posit the existance of some kind of advanced technology that generates and manipulates either energy beams (laser, microwave, radio, ultraviolet, gamma, etc) or subatomic particles (alpha, beta, protons, ions, etc) in order to influence and manipulate structures and objects at a distance.
Knowledge of this type of technology is NOT new as it was originally planned to be the basis of the Reagan administrations much publicized "Star Wars Defense Initiative". This was decades ago so it stands to reason that such technology would be far superior in design and capabilities today. In fact, laser technology is so advanced that the military has even built megawatt lasers into planes to attack and disable enemy planes, transports & missiles. So utilizing this sort of weaponary from high altitude is a PROVEN fact.

One also has to bear in mind that the clandestine militarization of low orbit space has been a possibility for many decades now. It's also a known FACT that the majority of launches taking place are military and therefore, secretive by implication. So it's by no means a stretch of the imagination or technically impossible to place an energy/particle beam weapon into orbit and then to keep it's existance a secret. The military abounds with similar examples of such development that is publically disavowed or denied for lengthy periods of time before eventually being acknowledged.


Continued in next post ...

reply to post by jfj123


Continued from previous post ...


Out of the possible beam/particle options, a few posters have latched onto microwaves as the most likely means by which wheat plants could be influenced from a distance. This may seem like a realistic possibility until one considers the following obvious limitations:
- In order for a microwave beam to make it from low earth orbit thru the atmosphere and to hit a ground based object, would have to be generated with an enormous
initial energy level as significant losses would occur due to atmospheric absorption/scattering of the beam.
- Defocusing of the beam as it passes thru the atmosphere - again reducing amount of useable energy striking the target.
- Unpredictable amount of energy transferred to target ... too much would cause serious heating effects ... too little would have no effect.

And the same would probably hold true no matter what type of energy the beam was composed of e.g. microwave, infra-red, radio, etc

The above objections (and more) would dictate that the choice of microwave energy is not the most optimum means of accurately manipulating soft targets such as plants and that we need to look to alternatives.

And yes, there IS an alternative available ... one that IS absolutely feasible and possible based on the current level of technology ... and also has the benefit of being able to give a logical and understandable solution to not only HOW cc's are created but also WHY. That's something that neither the "alien" theory OR the "rope & board" theory have been able to do.

I've posted this info earlier in this thread but it's worth repeating once more for your benefit ... here it is.

Because it was obvious that the plants had been physically pushed over by something, I had actually been leaning towards a particle beam rather than an energy beam. Both types have been researched by the military for decades. A particle beam is basically composed of some form of "matter" such as protons, alpha particles, electrons, ions, etc and if a concentrated beam of such particles struck an object, a considerable force could be imparted allowing the stalks to be "pushed" down. But like an energy beam, there is the problem of being able to accurately control the direction that the stalks are pushed down. Irrespective of these difficulties, I still held firm to the belief that some form of directed energy/particle was the technology being used.

But then a possible answer appeared in an article I read the other day that may have a solution to how the stalks could be "pushed" over by some form of military technology.
Here's a link ... news.softpedia.com...

Basically, the military has/is researching/developing a way to create an explosion at a distance using a laser beam. The device uses a technology known as "Dynamic Pulse Detonation (DPD). A short but intense laser pulse creates a ball of plasma and a second laser pulse generates a supersonic shockwave with the plasma to generate a bright flash and a loud bang.

With the above information, let's see how this might be used to create a crop circle effect.

A military satellite containing this type of technology is launched into low earth orbit. This weaponary is controlled and directed by sophisticated computer software that is capable of targetting an area of ground extremely accurately and precisely guiding the laser beam in any desired direction. Now based on the information contained in the article, an initial laser pulse is directed onto a target ... in this case a wheat field ... creating a ball of plasma (highly ionised air) directly above a patch of wheat. A second laser pulse is then used to "detonate" this plasma ball resulting in a pressure wave being directed towards the ground .. and the wheat. This pressure wave could be sufficiently powerful to physically "bend" the stalks over.

The article also states the following interesting points:

"It uses a programmed pattern of rapid plasma events" ... in other words, COMPUTER controlled and directed !

"The maximum range of the system at around a hundred meters." ... now, how big are some of the more complex designs ?

"This type of capability is at the core of what we eventually expect from the technology."

So basically, this technology is designed to use an energy device (a laser) to rapidly heat a volume of air and turn it into a plasma. This plasma is then almost instantaneously "detonated" by a second laser pulse. Would anyone be prepared to state categorically that the military doesn't have incredibly powerful lasers at their disposal ? Not me !
And depending on the frequency of the laser, it could pass thru the atmosphere with very little reduction in power or dispersal.
The controlling software could easily be programmed to create a design of any shape or complexity simply by creating plasma balls at the right spot and detonating it, resulting in the wheat directly below being crushed by the pressure wave.

And because a plasma ball glows, this could so easily explain how many people have stated that they've seen glowing energy balls where a CC is later found !


Now all of the above information is freely available in the public domain but I have no doubts that what we, the public, are shown regarding the capablities of such a technology fall somewhat short of it's actual and true capabilities.

So you can continue scratching your collective heads and ridiculing each others pet theories OR you can apply a bit of lateral thinking, step outside of the box that you've found yourselves in regarding cc creation and take a good look around you at just WHAT IS/MIGHT be possible by the application of current and levels of technology.
Now I'm sure that you'll immediately jump back on your "debunk wagon" and wave your hands around yelling "hogwash', "bunkum", "not possible" ... yaddah, yaddah, yaddah ... but too bad ... the technology EXISTS and the hypothesis is LOGICAL and offers a PLAUSIBLE crop circle creation explanation than any other that has been put forward to date!!!

If you look close in the higher resolution pictures you can see that the crop is flattened in a circular pattern as is consistent with board and plankers. If I hadn't watched the MIT challenge to make a convincing crop circle with the round iron particles and that whole bit I'd be almost inclined to believe this was ET's work, but those MIT kids made it look so easy and this one just looks man made from every angle.

I know Crop Circles: Mystery in the Fields doesn't convince everyone, but they were given a day and had to produce this stuff in the field. A dedicated hoaxer gets more than a day to magnetize and cook the iron and then just gets to load up a blower. At any rate no matter how big and complex the pattern, all it takes is a bit of planning in advance to execute it rapidly. This one is totally man made IMO.

Originally posted by afoolbyanyothername

I'm finding it very interesting how you manage to deride and dispute the majority of posts that apparently don't fit in with your personal notion of how cc's are created. The message I'm getting (and I'm sure others are too) is that you've set yourself up as a self-proclaimed debunker and are unwilling to concede that some of these other posts may in fact, contain some measure of validity ... especially if unusual technology is mentioned or implied. Quite a narrow minded and provincial attitude, indeed.

I find it interesting that you are trying to twist my posts. I dispute people who make claims but refuse to post any evidence to support their claims.

Originally posted by afoolbyanyothername
reply to post by jfj123

 

1. Please show how microwaves can be used in this manner.
2. Please show that the US military has this capability.
3. Please show that the US has a satellite armed with said technology.

If these questions can't be answered to any degree of certainty, then their COMPLETELY BASELESS GUESSES.

There is no reason to continue discussing microwaves being used by the US military to create crop circles unless we're going to discuss the following alternative hypothesis:
Giant, Invisible, Flying, Purple Wombats from planet Xenu are creating the crop circles using their electromagnetic/microwave eye beams.

Both hypothesis' are just as reasonable so will we be discussing both ?

I'm finding it very interesting how you manage to deride and dispute the majority of posts that apparently don't fit in with your personal notion of how cc's are created. The message I'm getting (and I'm sure others are too) is that you've set yourself up as a self-proclaimed debunker and are unwilling to concede that some of these other posts may in fact, contain some measure of validity ... especially if unusual technology is mentioned or implied. Quite a narrow minded and provincial attitude, indeed.

I think it's interesting how you are attempting to twist the meaning of my posts. All I"m saying is that if you're going to make a wild claim, back it up. If you can't back it up, you might want to rethink your claim.

[edit on 3-8-2009 by jfj123]

reply to post by jfj123

I think it's interesting how you are attempting to twist the meaning of my posts. All I"m saying is that if you're going to make a wild claim, back it up. If you can't back it up, you might want to rethink your claim.

And in your own words ... "wild claim".
There you go, demonstrating your immediate disdain and opposition for any opinion that doesn't conform to your personal notion of "validity".
What gives you the experience, expertise and technical knowledge to lay down statements such as "wild claim" ? If you have such credentials, then by all means openly present them so we can all willingly acknowledge your undisputable crop circle accumen.

If you can't back it up, you might want to rethink your claim.

Seems like I have done just that in my previous posts to you. I postulated an alternative cc creation hypothesis which in the final analysis may or may not prove to be the correct one ... but irrespective, have done so basing it on ONLY currently available technology and knowhow and in the process, successfully managed to provide reasonable and logical explanations for many observable crop circle properties. This is far more than can be said for alien involvement with it's ZERO supporting evidence OR rope & plank involvement with it's ZERO completed analysis of a SINGLE complex crop circle design and execution in it's entirety.
Those adhering to the rope & plank dogma continuously regurgitate the same old tired cliches as to how SIMPLE and EASY it MUST be. After all, the cc is plainly there on the ground and say to themselves, "how easy that must be to make ... a circle here ... a line there ... and viola, a crop circle is born !".
You're continuously asking for proof ... let's momentarily turn the tables and let ME ask you to pull out a detailed analysis of just what it takes to turn an idea in someone's head into a full blown, 100's of square meters, complex and complicated graphic "etched" into a wheat field. Don't forget to supply satisfactory evidence as to how the following are handled:
- a satisfactory analysis of how the design is transferred from paper to the crop
- how the graphic is surveyed and plotted onto the crop
- evidence that a board DOES indeed crush and compress wheat stalks in such a fashion
- how individual members communicate when working on different sections of the design
- how undulating terrain is factored into the initial design
- how the terrain/location for a cc is selected
- how very low light conditions are coped with

Phewwww ... those will do for a start .....


As for MY evidence, again I state that I have only relied on technology that is either currently known to be available and/or known to be under development.

Broken down, my hypothesis to be plausible depends on nothing but the following capabilities and hardware and can be stated as FACT.

- Military space launch, delivery and operating capability --> EXISTS
- Technologically existing/feasible weapons system --> EXISTS (source supplied in previous post)
- Computer software capable of imaging the surface in detail --> EXISTS
- Computer software capable of control, tracking and guidance --> EXISTS
- Computer software capable of generating and executing complex graphics --> EXISTS

In addition, my hypothesis offers an explanation of HOW the wheat is
crushed and compressed; it explains WHY farm fields are selected as the target; it explains HOW the intricate graphics process is controlled; it explains WHY glowing "balls" are occasionally spotted; it explains WHY no one has EVER been caught in the process of cc creation; it explains the INCREASING sophistication of the designs; it explains HOW intricate cc's are created so quickly ... and more ....

And again, I reiterate ... using nothing more than currently available harware and existing capabilities, a LOGICAL and PLAUSIBLE explanation for the crop circle phenomena begins to emerge.

So based on the above, it doesn't take an overactive imagination or a "massive leap" to see that the individual components HAVE the capability of being combined to create the effects being regularly observed.

There's your evidence ... so which parts are you NOW going to disagree with ?
Oh, don't forget to post a valid reason !

Originally posted by afoolbyanyothername
reply to post by jfj123

 

I think it's interesting how you are attempting to twist the meaning of my posts. All I"m saying is that if you're going to make a wild claim, back it up. If you can't back it up, you might want to rethink your claim.

And in your own words ... "wild claim".
There you go, demonstrating your immediate disdain and opposition for any opinion that doesn't conform to your personal notion of "validity".

And all you have to do to shut me up is simply back up your position. But that's not what you're doing. You're deflecting the argument to once again ATTEMPT to make me look bad instead of simply answering questions. You could stop all this back and forth by BACKING UP YOUR CLAIMS. So why are you refusing to do this?

What gives you the experience, expertise and technical knowledge to lay down statements such as "wild claim" ? If you have such credentials, then by all means openly present them so we can all willingly acknowledge your undisputable crop circle accumen.

I can't disprove a double negative. You're actually asking me to prove something doesn't exist by stating how it would be made if it existed. You're making no sense.

If you can't back it up, you might want to rethink your claim.

Seems like I have done just that in my previous posts to you.

You have not backed up your claims with evidence so your statement is FALSE. You have given opinion but tried to present it as fact and all I've done is ask you to back up what you're saying.

I postulated

aka GUESSED

an alternative cc creation hypothesis which in the final analysis may or may not prove to be the correct one ...

And all I'm saying that it is no more valid then my Giant, flying, invisible, purple wombat hypothesis.

but irrespective, have done so basing it on ONLY currently available technology

You can't say that because you've been asked to produce said current technology and you've refused over and over.

This is far more than can be said for alien involvement with it's ZERO supporting evidence

Agreed.

OR rope & plank involvement with it's ZERO completed analysis of a SINGLE complex crop circle design and execution in it's entirety.

Incorrect. This info has been posted many times. And NO I'm not going to post it again. I've done so, and many others have done so. If you want to see it, go back in the thread and read it for yourself.

Those adhering to the rope & plank dogma continuously regurgitate the same old tired cliches as to how SIMPLE and EASY it MUST be.

It is.

After all, the cc is plainly there on the ground and say to themselves, "how easy that must be to make ... a circle here ... a line there ... and viola, a crop circle is born !".

Although simplified, this is correct.

You're continuously asking for proof ... let's momentarily turn the tables and let ME ask you to pull out a detailed analysis of just what it takes to turn an idea in someone's head into a full blown, 100's of square meters, complex and complicated graphic "etched" into a wheat field.

This info has been posted many times. I'm not going to post it again. Re-read the thread and find it for yourself.

Don't forget to supply satisfactory evidence as to how the following are handled:
- a satisfactory analysis of how the design is transferred from paper to the crop

Done.

- how the graphic is surveyed and plotted onto the crop

Done.

- evidence that a board DOES indeed crush and compress wheat stalks in such a fashion

Done.

- how individual members communicate when working on different sections of the design

Done.

- how undulating terrain is factored into the initial design

Done.

- how the terrain/location for a cc is selected

Ask the circle makers. Only they know unless they've told others.

- how very low light conditions are coped with

Done.

Phewwww ... those will do for a start .....

All this info has been answered already so I guess you're all set right?

As for MY evidence, again I state that I have only relied on technology that is either currently known to be available and/or known to be under development.

Post it.

Broken down, my hypothesis to be plausible depends on nothing but the following capabilities and hardware and can be stated as FACT.

- Military space launch, delivery and operating capability --> EXISTS
- Technologically existing/feasible weapons system --> EXISTS (source supplied in previous post)
- Computer software capable of imaging the surface in detail --> EXISTS
- Computer software capable of control, tracking and guidance --> EXISTS
- Computer software capable of generating and executing complex graphics --> EXISTS

Post the specific technology you're referring to.

In addition, my hypothesis offers an explanation of HOW the wheat is
crushed and compressed;

So does my wombat hypothesis

it explains WHY farm fields are selected as the target;

Sorry, I must have missed that one. How are they selected?

it explains HOW the intricate graphics process is controlled;

Please explain this.

it explains WHY glowing "balls" are occasionally spotted;

What technology would create glowing balls and under what conditions are they created? What are the glowing balls made of?

it explains WHY no one has EVER been caught in the process of cc creation;

People have been caught. This has also been posted.

it explains the INCREASING sophistication of the designs;

So does a guy who practices his designs and wants to improve upon them. I get better each time I begin a new painting.

it explains HOW intricate cc's are created so quickly ... and more ....

With a decent team, I can build an entire house in 3 days from beginning to end. That's a bit harder then creating a crop circle in a couple of hours..don't you think?

And again, I reiterate ... using nothing more than currently available harware and existing capabilities,

But how can we know this since you've never, ever posted information about said technology?

a LOGICAL and PLAUSIBLE explanation for the crop circle phenomena begins to emerge.

Yes the wombat hypothesis is the most logical and plausible explanation.

So based on the above, it doesn't take an overactive imagination or a "massive leap" to see that the individual components HAVE the capability of being combined to create the effects being regularly observed.

Then combine them, post the info and show us how the technology could be used to create crop circles.

There's your evidence ...

You haven't posted any evidence, only opinion.

so which parts are you NOW going to disagree with ?

Pretty much all of it.

Oh, don't forget to post a valid reason !

I did. But thanks for asking

Originally posted by jfj123

Originally posted by warpath1984
reply to post by jfj123

 

why would the us military bomb one of their own ships and simply blame it on the vietnamese? obviously for ulterior motives.

And just how would they do it?

1. Please show how microwaves can be used in this manner.
2. Please show that the US military has this capability.
3. Please show that the US has a satellite armed with said technology.

If these questions can't be answered to any degree of certainty, then their COMPLETELY BASELESS GUESSES.

There is no reason to continue discussing microwaves being used by the US military to create crop circles unless we're going to discuss the following alternative hypothesis:
Giant, Invisible, Flying, Purple Wombats from planet Xenu are creating the crop circles using their electromagnetic/microwave eye beams.

Both hypothesis' are just as reasonable so will we be discussing both ?

jfj theyve already been answered. i just have not made the video to give you my source yet. but this is very old news. only new to you because you havent heard them (the scientist) talk about how the DOD developed this technology back in the 40s and started shooting down microwaves into fields to test their technology. years later they started making your crop circles and now many are hooked into believing aliens from outer space are graffiting your wheat fields simply to entertain you and who knows who else who believes such ridiculousness.
when i make the video on youtube ill let you sit and argue with those doctors/scientist who revealed this DOD technology. then its up to you to say to yourself. 'dam ive been fooled.' afterwards you will get over it and realize aliens dont care to entertain you with graffiti in cornfields.

Originally posted by warpath1984


jfj theyve already been answered. i just have not made the video to give you my source yet. but this is very old news. only new to you because you havent heard them (the scientist) talk about how the DOD developed this technology back in the 40s and started shooting down microwaves into fields to test their technology.

So EXACTLY when can I see this video?
You've been talking about this for awhile now.
Post the raw footage. That should speed things up.

Originally posted by trueforger
reply to post by warpath1984

 

What you mean is after the launching of the rocket,after the building of the launchpad after the committees have approved and budgeted said operation,one person actually pressed an alleged button,setting in motion a whole process probably employing hundreds if not thousands of people,all for what exactly?Pretty glyphs.With a message? or a movie? Mavbe some religious faction within dod is prepping us for their holographic second coming.These are signs and wonders.That's what all the missing money is being squandered on,now I get it...

us govt admitted bombing its own ship to have excuse to enter vietnam conflict. you might want to argue with them guy. im unconcerned with what you think you know. i deal in factual documented statements from the usa. sorry.

Originally posted by jfj123

Originally posted by warpath1984


jfj theyve already been answered. i just have not made the video to give you my source yet. but this is very old news. only new to you because you havent heard them (the scientist) talk about how the DOD developed this technology back in the 40s and started shooting down microwaves into fields to test their technology.

So EXACTLY when can I see this video?
You've been talking about this for awhile now.
Post the raw footage. That should speed things up.

ive actually been talking about this for about one single day.
when i make the video then you can see it.

Originally posted by warpath1984

Originally posted by jfj123

Originally posted by warpath1984


jfj theyve already been answered. i just have not made the video to give you my source yet. but this is very old news. only new to you because you havent heard them (the scientist) talk about how the DOD developed this technology back in the 40s and started shooting down microwaves into fields to test their technology.

So EXACTLY when can I see this video?
You've been talking about this for awhile now.
Post the raw footage. That should speed things up.

ive actually been talking about this for about one single day.
when i make the video then you can see it.

When?
Surely if you're putting a video together and you have all the info you need, you must have a completion date right?
Where is the raw footage? Please post the raw footage here or at least the links to the raw footage.
When EXACTLY will you be posting the finished video?
thanks.

Originally posted by Kingfanpaul

Originally posted by visible_villain
reply to post by watchZEITGEISTnow

 

Sorry guys ... 12 people could execute this in under 30 minutes ...

Maybe 12 guys could pull this off, but I am sorry there is no way 12 guys can pull that off in less than 30 minutes.

or DOD satellites using microwaves in 50 seconds.

Originally posted by jfj123

Originally posted by warpath1984

Originally posted by jfj123

Originally posted by warpath1984


jfj theyve already been answered. i just have not made the video to give you my source yet. but this is very old news. only new to you because you havent heard them (the scientist) talk about how the DOD developed this technology back in the 40s and started shooting down microwaves into fields to test their technology.

So EXACTLY when can I see this video?
You've been talking about this for awhile now.
Post the raw footage. That should speed things up.

ive actually been talking about this for about one single day.
when i make the video then you can see it.

When?
Surely if you're putting a video together and you have all the info you need, you must have a completion date right?
Where is the raw footage? Please post the raw footage here or at least the links to the raw footage.
When EXACTLY will you be posting the finished video?
thanks.

jfj try calming down. when i make the video youll see it. trying to hasten the process is not going to debunk the reality that youve been duped due to your gullibility to believe alien life forms are making graffiti in corn fields.

Originally posted by warpath1984

jfj try calming down. when i make the video youll see it. trying to hasten the process is not going to debunk the reality that youve been duped due to your gullibility to believe alien life forms are making graffiti in corn fields.

I'm not trying to hasten "the process". Arteests are just Soooooo tempramental

I just want to know when it will be done? You know when it will be done, don't you? You're the one working on it right?

Also, I'd like to see the raw footage because...well I'm inquisitive

Why do you consider these things so unreasonable?



[edit on 3-8-2009 by jfj123]

reply to post by jfj123

Broken down, my hypothesis to be plausible depends on nothing but the following capabilities and hardware and can be stated as FACT.

- Military space launch, delivery and operating capability --> EXISTS
- Technologically existing/feasible weapons system --> EXISTS (source supplied in previous post)
- Computer software capable of imaging the surface in detail --> EXISTS
- Computer software capable of control, tracking and guidance --> EXISTS
- Computer software capable of generating and executing complex graphics --> EXISTS

Post the specific technology you're referring to.

Can do ...

I believe that we can both agree that the military does indeed have space launch, delivery and operating capabilities and for the purpose of this post of mine, need not be debated further.

However, to establish the plausability of the hypothesis that man-made technology is the main effecting agent of crop circle designs, we need to establish that the 2 main components critical to the plausability of the hypothesis currently DO exist in some form or other and are potentially capable of creating the observed effects. These critical components consist of the following:
(1) the energy beam generating technology
(2) the control and tracking software of the beam itself


(1) The energy beam generating technology
The principle involved here is one whereby a high intensity laser pulse (not necessarily in the visible light spectrum) is used to ionize air directly infront of (OR DIRECTLY ABOVE) the target by rapidly superheating it and effectively creating a region of plasma. This plasma region is then "detonated" by a 2nd laser pulse resulting in a rapid expansion of the surrounding air.
Such technology EXISTS and is being developed based on a grant originating from the WhiteHouse "Office of Management and Budget" involving at least one recipient, namely Stellar Photonics.

------------

Source:
www.whitehouse.gov... mark-id=216846&web-timestamp=&public-view=true

Agency: Department of Defense--Military
Bureau: Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation
Account: Research, development, test, and evaluation, Army (21-2040)
Certifying Official: Deputy Comptroller Program/Budget
Contact Information: WWW.DOD.GOV... 703-697-5131

Description:
Dynamic Pulse Detonation: Explore a phenomenon referred to as Dynamic Pulse detonation which involves the creation of high intensity impulse forces by detonating laser induced plasmas.

------

Source:
www.sphotonics.com...

Quotes:
"The system works by producing non-lethal plasmas in front of a target. The plasma is generated by a laser superheating the air in front of a target causing rapid expansion ..."

"... with highly agile speed-of-light delivery and exceptional accuracy and adjustability ..."

-----

Source:
docs.google.com...:LVTUz4hJ8xAJ:www.dtic.mil/descriptivesum/Y2007/Army/0602624A.pdf+%22dynamic+pulse+detonation%22&hl=en&gl=au

Document: ARMY RDT&E BUDGET ITEM JUSTIFICATION (R2 Exhibit)
Budget Activity: 2 - Applied Research
PE Number & Title: 0602624A - Weapons and Munitions Technology
Project: S3000 - Dynamic Pulse Detonation

-----

Source:
www.asafm.army.mil...

Document: DESCRIPTIVE SMMARIES OF THE RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION
PE Number & Title: 0602307A - Advanced Weapons Technology
PE Number & Title: 0602782A - Command, Control, Communications Technology
PE Number & Title: 0602783A - Computer & Software Technology
PE Number & Title: 0603772A - Advanced tactical Computer Science & Sensor Tech
PE Number & Title: 0604716A - Terrain Information
PE Number & Title: 0604778A - Positioning Systems Development (Space)
PE Number & Title: 0605605A - DOD High Energy Laser Test Facility

-----

Source:
74.125.153.132...:GCjKGj7VP68J:reichert.house.gov/UploadedFiles/DEF_-_Stellar_Photonics.pdf+%22dynamic+pulse+detonation%22+dod&cd=6 &hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=au&lr=lang_en

Quote:
"This application is a continuation of under the Dynamic Pulse Detonation (DPD) program"



(2) The control and tracking software of the beam itself

The following information was derived from the "ABL YAL 1A Airborne Laser" system. However, there is no technical reason why this system could not be adopted/modified to comply with the hypothesis stated as the necessary computer software to acquire and track the target obviously exists.

Source:
www.airforce-technology.com...

Quote:
"... high speed target acquisition system and a high precision laser target tracking beam control system."

"... used to determine the target's range and provides initial information on the atmosphere through which the beam is being transmitted. The illuminating laser tracks the target and provides aiming data for the primary beam."

"... reflects light from the target to provide data on the rapidly changing characteristics of the atmosphere along the path of the laser beam. This data is used to control a set of deformable mirrors in the beam control system. The mirrors introduce tailored distortions into the COIL laser beam to compensate for atmospheric distortions and allow the COIL laser beam to fall on the target."


So there you have it, more than enough verification that such technology does indeed EXIST and is theoretically capable of generating the necessary requirements for cc creation.
Energy generation
Acquisition and tracking of target
Delivery of energy in a form that is quite capable of displacing targeted and specific plant stalk regions thru the application of increased air pressure.

Additional sources are available but I believe what I have provided more than satisfies your request for specific technical information.

Continued in next post ....