It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Gakona HAARP on Full Power during Earthquake in Haiti!

page: 21
52
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 29 2010 @ 01:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Helmkat
 

No problem at all. Again, somehow I missed your post before and for that I apologize. I'm glad to have gotten some of your inquiries taken care of.




posted on Jan, 29 2010 @ 01:25 AM
link   
reply to post by davesidious
 

Well, there's no way to prove that HAARP was ever a weapon other than looking at what it is capable of. However, there are ways to prove that it COULD be used as such. For instance: A bulldozer for all technical purposes isn't a weapon, but, if I chose to drive one right into your home while you were sleeping, it could kill you, your family or anyone else who was in the way. Despite what the bulldozer is actually for, it could still be utilized in alternate ways of its original design. Well, this was my EXACT point that I have illuminated on this thread about HAARP.

AGAIN...I NEVER said that HAARP was a weapon (although since the military made it, I have my doubts) or that it was used in Haiti. I believe that this small detail is where our mis-communication began. I said that judging from HAARP's capabilities, it was possible that HAARP COULD have been used in that scenario and I provided the information that supports that claim.

And no...2+2 still equals 4. In a multi-dimensional reality though, ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE.


[edit on 29-1-2010 by EvolvedMinistry]



posted on Jan, 29 2010 @ 06:37 AM
link   
reply to post by EvolvedMinistry
 


And I said that HAARP, in no way, has the capacity of being used as a weapon, except maybe against a tiny patch of ionosphere directly above the facility, and even then it'd have less effect than a microsecond of sunshine.

You have not provided any information that suggests it is capable of being a weapon, even if you think so. All you provided was link after link of weapons of completely different configuration whose only similarity is they use electromagnetic radiation, which demonstrates nothing. Your understanding of EM radiation seems to be sorely lacking, and your desire to show a conspiracy is more important than being right.

So yes, in your posts, 2+2=eleventy-point-five million.



posted on Jan, 29 2010 @ 07:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by davesidious
reply to post by EvolvedMinistry
 



So yes, in your posts, 2+2=eleventy-point-five million.


And consequently, you've provided no information that says the HAARP isn't a weapon. As a matter of fact, you've provided NO INFORMATION at all. In all due respect, given the fact that you haven't contributed one viable link to this thread makes me wonder why you expect that your opinion should be valued. No one can take you seriously because You argue with nothing to back your opinion, you ask for evidence that you don't intend to read, and then you anger easily when one shows you information that you cannot refute. reminder: William Cohen. As far as I'm concerned, you have no argument and haven't developed enough merit to be even having this conversation with me. After this post, you'll simply be on ignore because without evidence to back your claims, you're not worth entertaining.

So, you can stick with your stance all you like and continue to try to undo what has already been done. It affects nothing. Those who needed and asked for my information got it. There's nothing that you can do about that no matter how you try to refute the evidence by constantly making directionless jabs. You won't change the situation and as far as I'm concerned on my end...mission accomplished.

So, you're 2+2 analogy just equates to the fact that you have difficulty with addition and critical analysis. OUCH.

Again...its been a pleasure Dave. You are quite entertaining.


[edit on 29-1-2010 by EvolvedMinistry]



posted on Jan, 29 2010 @ 07:48 AM
link   
reply to post by EvolvedMinistry
 


I don't have to show how it isn't a weapon, as that is clearly not what the operators of the equipment claim. Here is their site. Clearly if you've come to the conclusion that HAARP is possibly some kind of weapon, you've read that site in its entirety. I shouldn't have to send you the link, as you've already got it.

As Carl Sagan said, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. You are making the extraordinary claims, so please - show us your extraordinary evidence.

I don't have to show any evidence. You clearly don't understand what critical thinking. A discussion is not about throwing links back and forth, but by challenging the accepted position with new evidence. Only conspiracy theorists think HAARP is anything other than it claims to be, making it being a weapon far from being the accepted position. So it falls solely on your shoulders to provide evidence to the contrary. YouTube videos are not evidence, btw.

My critical analysis skills seem far better than yours, as at least I understand when no evidence exists. You seem to think no evidence is somehow evidence of something sinister. That is by very definition irrational, and bordering on the delusional.

[edit on 29-1-2010 by davesidious]

[edit on 29-1-2010 by davesidious]



posted on Feb, 2 2010 @ 07:14 PM
link   
whenever HAARP is running we can see it in the clouds up here and i can account that not only is this thing causing earthquakes and hurricanes but has more to do with global warming then the higher ups will ever admit to the public. just like when Russia hid the failures of rocket launches from its people during the cold war.



posted on Feb, 2 2010 @ 07:34 PM
link   
The real motives behind it are communications and weapons defense as well as protection from losing communications during predicted upcoming solar storms so we are not left defenseless. the fact that we could short circuit the ionosphere and the extremely low energy waves pumped into it having to go somewhere causing storms and interrupting the natural wind cycles is all just icing on the cake. Not a weather weapon anymore, just protection from events set in motion by it in the first place



posted on Feb, 3 2010 @ 06:32 AM
link   
reply to post by lunarcase227
 


Evidence, or it didn't happen.

reply to post by lunarcase227
 


The ionosphere has nothing to do with the weather, it is tens of miles above any weather systems, and the amount of energy released by HAARP into the ionosphere is dwarfed by the amount of energy the sun releases into the ionosphere every millisecond of daytime.

You appear to be arguing from ignorance and conjecture, not understanding.



posted on Feb, 3 2010 @ 06:52 AM
link   
Rather than looking at the magnetic waves, how about looking at the missing data on January 11th. To the experts, how is this explained? I can't find missing data on any other days...if the data were actually there, would it be showing anything significant?

The graphs can found at the following links:

Spectrum Monitor Waterfall Chart

HF Chart (1-30MHz)

VHF Chart (100-200MHz)

NCDXF Beacons (14.1MHz)

NCDXF Beacons (18.11MHz)

Select February 11th, 2010 (the day before the quake) for all graphs, and you'll always find the gap in the data. However, if you choose any other date, the data looks normal.



posted on Feb, 3 2010 @ 07:21 AM
link   
reply to post by MightyAl
 


Because February 11 is in 8 days time?? If you check January 11, the day before the quake, you'll find your data.

There is no evidence HAARP had anything to do with the Haiti quake. None. The only 'evidence' we've seen so far is misunderstanding by laypeople.

Deny ignorance, please?



posted on Feb, 3 2010 @ 08:50 PM
link   
reply to post by davesidious
 


Sorry, made a typo. I meant January 11th, 2009, you'll find a gap in the data. Check it out first. I never claimed I know anything much about HAARP. Just found this info HERE quite interesting. So, yeah call me ignorant if you want, as I am indeed ignorant in this area, as I simply believe the earthquake occurred naturally, but then find it interesting that some people insist it was intentional
So a man of all knowledge such as you should be able to enlighten me


Besides earlier in this thread it was already made clear that the magnetic data is affected by solar radiation. I just need to say, as with 9/11, the US government is taking advantage of the situation once again.

[edit on 3-2-2010 by MightyAl]



posted on Feb, 4 2010 @ 06:28 AM
link   
Glad to see that some of you are very skeptical of the HAARP claim. The best place to learn about HAARP is either your local HAM radio operator or the University of Alaska's research project website www.haarp.alaska.edu. The next fundamental question is can earthquakes be created by man or technology? Yes, but only on a very small scale. You can learn about the thousands of microquakes that were created in Colorado by saline injection into deep wells on a fault line here

Jon Ake, Kenneth Mahrer, Daniel O’Connell and Lisa Block, "Deep-Injection and Closely Monitored Induced Seismicity at Paradox Valley, Colorado," 95 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 664 (2005)
bssa.geoscienceworld.org...

You can get a comparison of the largest 4.3 and the Haitian 7.0 in the Wikipedia here - en.wikipedia.org...
Note the relative frequency of the 4.3 (and the thousands of imperceptible induced microquakes of 2.7 and below)

Now, for those of you who still swear up and down that earthquakes are caused, ask HOW? It is impossible. There is no way to apply the necessary energy at the depth of the hypocenter. This quake's was
13 km (8.1 miles) below the surface. It is not possible to drill to this depth and if it were, it would have required a large drill rig on site for months.



posted on Feb, 4 2010 @ 06:48 AM
link   
To add, from Wikipedia, the deepest hole ever drilled on earth is in the former Soviet Union - note the length of time that was required - drilling began in 1970 - it took 9 years to dig 5KM

en.wikipedia.org...

The Kola Superdeep Borehole (Russian: Кольская сверхглубокая скважина) is the result of a scientific drilling project of the former USSR. The project attempted to drill as deep as possible into the Earth's crust. Drilling began on 24 May 1970 on the Kola Peninsula, using the Uralmash-4E, and later the Uralmash-15000 series drilling rig. A number of boreholes were drilled by branching from a central hole. The deepest, SG-3, reached 12,261 metres (40,230 ft) in 1989, and remains the deepest hole ever drilled.[1]

The initial target depth was set at 15,000 m (49,000 ft). On 6 June 1979, the world depth record held by the Bertha Rogers hole in Wa#a County, Oklahoma at 9,583 m (31,440 ft)[3] was broken. In 1983, the drill passed 12,000 m (39,000 ft), and drilling was stopped for about a year to celebrate the event.[4] This idle period may have contributed to a break-down on 27 September 1984: after drilling to 12,066 m (39,590 ft), a 5,000 m (16,000 ft) section of drillpipe twisted off and was left in the hole. Drilling was later restarted from 7,000 m (23,000 ft).[4] The hole reached 12,262 m (40,230 ft) in 1989. In that year the hole depth was expected to reach 13,500 m (44,000 ft) by the end of 1990 and 15,000 m (49,000 ft) by 1993.[5] However, due to higher than expected temperatures at this depth and location, 180 °C (356 °F) instead of expected 100 °C (212 °F), drilling deeper was deemed unfeasible and the drilling was stopped in 1992.[4] With the expected further increase in temperature with increasing depth, drilling to 15,000 m (49,000 ft) would have meant working at a projected 300 °C (570 °F), at which the drill bit would no longer work.



posted on Feb, 4 2010 @ 02:22 PM
link   
reply to post by MightyAl
 


They have gaps in the data all over the place, as the instruments are not always running. There is absolutely, 100% no correlation between HAARP and the earthquake. None. Not a jot.



posted on Feb, 5 2010 @ 09:21 AM
link   
Here is some interesting interviews on HAARP for you guys.




It is very interesting that data on the Spectrum Monitor Waterfall Chart is not available for certain dates. I as well punched in 9/11...nothing, the Haiti earthquake...nothing, The tsunami.....nothing, then just out of curiosity...i punched in the Challenger explosion....nothing. Yet if you punch in other random dates, it is there. Makes you definitely wonder what that is all about. But true it is not always running.

[edit on 2/5/2010 by CaptGizmo]



posted on Feb, 5 2010 @ 09:55 AM
link   
reply to post by CaptGizmo
 


That is very low on science, high on conjecture. For a site that strives to deny ignorance, I don't think that really has a place here. We should stick with science, not TV shows



posted on Feb, 5 2010 @ 10:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by davesidious
reply to post by CaptGizmo
 


That is very low on science, high on conjecture. For a site that strives to deny ignorance, I don't think that really has a place here. We should stick with science, not TV shows


Uhhh..it interviews the guy who runs the program and asks him about the program itself. Not to mention the fact that I guess you failed to notice that this site that you decided to become a member of is ...A CONSPIRACY site! How in the world did you come to the conclusion that that video is ignorant.

The video asks hard questions, provide information about HAARP, power requirements, presents info on a former employer of the company that invented the technology, etc, etc, etc. What have you provided disproving any of it? Deny ignorance indeed. I noticed also that you jump from thread to thread doing this claiming there is no evidence so it is not real,etc. Yet I also noticed that you have never created one thread of your own!...Not one.

[edit on 2/5/2010 by CaptGizmo]

[edit on 2/5/2010 by CaptGizmo]



posted on Feb, 5 2010 @ 10:22 AM
link   
reply to post by CaptGizmo
 


The video is fantastically out of date. HAARP goes through constant changes. That video was first broadcast 14 years ago. The interview with Bernard Eastlund was from 1988, and he doesn't even mention anything suspicious. We know of the military implications for the device - long-range communication, blocking out enemy satellites, surveillance. It's not strange or scary. We know what it is, we know what it can do, and we know what it can't do. It's only conspiracy 'enthusiasts' that maintain otherwise, and they have no evidence to back up their ridiculous claims.

Being a conspiracy site does not mean we can act like hearsay is evidence. If anything, our standards of evidence should be much higher than the rest of the internet. But I guess that'd stop people talking about how reptilians are controlling the Queen, and how HAARP can cook a baby on the other side of the planet.

As soon as I find evidence of a conspiracy, or something interesting, I'll make a thread. Unlike many other people on this board, I need evidence, not just a gut feeling, before making my mind up. The number of threads people makes is no judge of the person.

I visit many threads and point out a lack of evidence because we are supposed to be denying ignorance, not making it feel welcome.

[edit on 5-2-2010 by davesidious]



posted on Feb, 5 2010 @ 10:25 AM
link   
reply to post by CaptGizmo
 

And just what does the "guy who runs the program" have to say about weather control, and earthquakes?

Bernard Eastlund, one of the holders of US Patent #4686605, never worked at HAARP.

The video takes a few facts and combines them with fear, ignorance, and speculation. The perfect conspiracy theory.

BTW, want some snake oil? Nick Begich has some for you on his website.
oooooh. Nanotronic Nutrients!
www.earthpulse.com...



posted on Feb, 5 2010 @ 10:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


I never stated that Bernard Eastlund worked for HAARP. He worked for the company that created the technology that Raytheon absorbed and is using in the HAARP program. In fact that is stated in the video? I have never stated that I was a believer in the HAARP conspiracy all together; simply find it interesting. I presented a video which had a interview I found important to this discussion. I believe I have provided some information not just blindly stating it is real or not real.


[edit on 2/5/2010 by CaptGizmo]

[edit on 2/5/2010 by CaptGizmo]



new topics

top topics



 
52
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join