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.

 

HAARP Active @ 7.406Mhz Shortwave

page: 21
82
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 6 2010 @ 04:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Neo Christian Mystic

The human body can generate or store static charges of tens of thousands volts which can knock out and destroy computers, credit cards etc.

However, the body itself generates mere millivolts. Had we been able to produce equally power-efficient machines we could run diggers and lorries on relatively small batteries, without the use of internal combustion engines or similar machines.


Anything can store static charges, so there's nothing odd going on there, although conductors like a metal ball, your dog or the human body can discharge them faster than a non-conductor, like a styrofoam ball. Conductors do store all their charge on the surface whereas a non-conductor can distribute the charge internally, that's probably the largest difference.

The body generates nothing more than millivolts, since that potential is a byproduct. But it's not the source of energy in the human body. That would be your metabolism, by which you break down chemical substances to produce ATP. ATP is where the power comes from in your body. The chemical energy in the food you eat makes ATP, some cells do this by fermentation alone (RBCs) but most use glycolysis, oxidative phosphorylation and the Krebs cycle, which is a lot more efficient.




posted on Apr, 6 2010 @ 04:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Bedlam
 


Just as I thought. You're not aware of what you're speaking of. At some point you'll come to terms with the idea that you're not nearly as smart as the pedestal that you've placed yourself on.

Enjoy the rest of your day.

Much love to all...



posted on Apr, 6 2010 @ 04:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


When they use words like "may" or "might" or "could" it means that there is an uncertainty with what they claim. So all we are left with is the actual numbers that speak for themselves. Granted some may be attributed to more technology now... but double from the 70s? Seems like a big jump. And BIG EARTHQUAKES are BIG EARTHQUAKES. People will feel them... that is how most large earthquakes have been detected since the beginning of time.

We are also left with what we can observe in life...

Maybe you have missed the large devistating earthquakes in the last few years. I however did not.

You are listening to the MS Science community a little too much and not thinking enough for yourself. These are the same people that claim one earthquake can not trigger another. Recently being proven to not be the case... THINK FOR YOURSELF!~ That all I will say... we will have to agree to disagree. As most do on this topic.

BTW... Do you believe that the Sun has nothing to do with earthquakes too? Seeing as how much data is now coming out that they are directly related. Do you still listen to the usgs on that?



posted on Apr, 6 2010 @ 04:38 PM
link   
reply to post by djcubed
 

Yes, exactly right. We have been able to detect strong earthquakes (over 7.0) for a long time. That is why the data for strong earthquakes is more reliable than that for weaker earthquakes.
Once again, here is that data (7.0 and greater):


No.
The Sun does not influence earthquakes (and neither does HAARP). If it did, we should see an eleven year cycle in there somewhere...we don't.

[edit on 4/6/2010 by Phage]



posted on Apr, 6 2010 @ 04:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by EvolvedMinistry
Just as I thought. You're not aware of what you're speaking of.


EM, old bean, the curriculum for Indiana University's bachelor in telecommunications major is there for all to see: and it's a humanities degree...

Contrast this to GT's EE course listing, which is where I got my bachelors and masters degree in EE, and my bachelors in physics (which was pretty much just some summer courses difference from the EE, and one more semester): ...and these are science courses, not humanities.

It's been fun. See you next thread.



posted on Apr, 6 2010 @ 05:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


You keep showing that graph... but if you really look at extended periods of time... there is an obvious trend of more/larger earthquakes. Lets look at real numbers and not this graph you keep posting to prove the SAME THING OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER... TAKE A FREASH LOOK!~

Perfect example... from the site you know and love... earthquake.usgs.gov...

We will go with the largest of all (8-9.9) to keep it simple... and we will only use dates from 1980-2009. Looking at them in 10 year blocks:

1980-1989 : 4
1990-1999 : 6
2000-2009 : 13

No calculator needed... HUGE QUAKES... only in the last 30 years. Am I the only one that sees a trend?



posted on Apr, 6 2010 @ 05:16 PM
link   
reply to post by earthdude
 


Now that's what I call positive thinking and funny.
Thanks Donny, LOl LOl



posted on Apr, 6 2010 @ 05:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bedlam

Originally posted by EvolvedMinistry
Just as I thought. You're not aware of what you're speaking of.


EM, old bean, the curriculum for Indiana University's bachelor in telecommunications major is there for all to see: and it's a humanities degree...

Contrast this to GT's EE course listing, which is where I got my bachelors and masters degree in EE, and my bachelors in physics (which was pretty much just some summer courses difference from the EE, and one more semester): ...and these are science courses, not humanities.

It's been fun. See you next thread.


Um yes...because there are NO science courses in Telecom that are required. No math either. No, thinking in fact. You just show up and they give you your degree. I'm glad that you're such a critical thinker.

And you're right. Its been fun, but, you probably won't see me next thread.



posted on Apr, 6 2010 @ 05:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bedlam

Originally posted by Neo Christian Mystic

The human body can generate or store static charges of tens of thousands volts which can knock out and destroy computers, credit cards etc.

However, the body itself generates mere millivolts. Had we been able to produce equally power-efficient machines we could run diggers and lorries on relatively small batteries, without the use of internal combustion engines or similar machines.


Anything can store static charges, so there's nothing odd going on there, although conductors like a metal ball, your dog or the human body can discharge them faster than a non-conductor, like a styrofoam ball. Conductors do store all their charge on the surface whereas a non-conductor can distribute the charge internally, that's probably the largest difference.

The body generates nothing more than millivolts, since that potential is a byproduct. But it's not the source of energy in the human body. That would be your metabolism, by which you break down chemical substances to produce ATP. ATP is where the power comes from in your body. The chemical energy in the food you eat makes ATP, some cells do this by fermentation alone (RBCs) but most use glycolysis, oxidative phosphorylation and the Krebs cycle, which is a lot more efficient.



Odd??? Who said anything about anything being odd??? Just fact. That's all. I don't at all think its odd that our brains use electricity in order to operate...do you? I don't think its odd that the brain is not only a transmitter, but receiver of information. I certainly hope this isn't new information or fringe science on your behalf, otherwise I would really be worried.

And everything that you said on the last half of your post is almost completely irrelevant to our initial conversation. You don't have to explain the digestive process to me, I'm pretty astute in that department. I was referring to synaptic charges.



posted on Apr, 6 2010 @ 05:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by djcubed
reply to post by Phage
 


You keep showing that graph... but if you really look at extended periods of time... there is an obvious trend of more/larger earthquakes. Lets look at real numbers and not this graph you keep posting to prove the SAME THING OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER... TAKE A FREASH LOOK!~

Perfect example... from the site you know and love... earthquake.usgs.gov...

We will go with the largest of all (8-9.9) to keep it simple... and we will only use dates from 1980-2009. Looking at them in 10 year blocks:

1980-1989 : 4
1990-1999 : 6
2000-2009 : 13

No calculator needed... HUGE QUAKES... only in the last 30 years. Am I the only one that sees a trend?


Don't ya know that you can't spin simple.
If you say 2+2 = 4
They would say at the speed of light through a worm hole backwards the hands of a clock would be sweept in such a direction that 2 o'clock am and 2 o.clock pm would = 3.9999999999999999 apm or maybe just a hair more than that maybe and you are IGNORANT and can't read and like that damn fool conspiracy crap.
That's what they tell me all the time.
I am going off to a cat thread. The signal hasn't been proven not to be HAARP.



posted on Apr, 6 2010 @ 05:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by EvolvedMinistry

Odd??? Who said anything about anything being odd??? Just fact. That's all. I don't at all think its odd that our brains use electricity in order to operate...do you? I don't think its odd that the brain is not only a transmitter, but receiver of information. I certainly hope this isn't new information or fringe science on your behalf, otherwise I would really be worried.

And everything that you said on the last half of your post is almost completely irrelevant to our initial conversation. You don't have to explain the digestive process to me, I'm pretty astute in that department. I was referring to synaptic charges.


Somehow I think you missed that my reply was to NCM, not you, so it's not unusual that the bit at the end had no relevance to your mistake that "synapses are composed of electricity", since it wasn't addressing your post at all.

ANYTHING can hold a static charge. So I don't find it unusual that the human body does, as well. I don't derive some arcane symbolic meaning from it. Ok, so you can build up a static charge. So can a balloon. Or a metal ball, or a grapefruit. (list goes on)

Your brain uses glucose to operate. The little electric potentials are just there for the ride. I like your "bees smell fear" listing of non-sequiturs, though. Did you know the human head weighs about eight pounds?



posted on Apr, 6 2010 @ 05:37 PM
link   
reply to post by djcubed
 

Yeah, 2007 was a rough year with 4 big ones. There have been worse.
But why limit the time span so much? Here's what it looks like since 1900 (8.0+).

Source

As with 7.0+, things seem to be calming down a bit (if you're looking for a trend).

No indication that HAARP (or the Sun) is involved.

[edit on 4/6/2010 by Phage]



posted on Apr, 6 2010 @ 06:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Sorry Phage... I'm going to be doing some research on the 7.8 that just hit...
But I will return to further debate the issue with you at some point.

It's actually a relief to debate with people on ATS that know how.


Much love man!~



posted on Apr, 6 2010 @ 06:43 PM
link   
Here's a nice one for you all. This site is awesome in their visualised info on quakes. Every week one can monitor registered quakes and they use simple easy-to-understand visualisations to show where they hit, their magnitude and energy yield, even children can comprehend this application of information in graphic format.

www.niceone.org...

[edit on 6/4/2010 by Neo Christian Mystic]



posted on Apr, 6 2010 @ 10:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Sorry, but that's just the silliest graph I've seen in quite some time.....

earthquake.usgs.gov...



posted on Apr, 6 2010 @ 10:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by David_Reale
I log on to ATS this morning, and three headlines catch my eyes:

"Magnitude 7.2 - Baja, California, Mexico"

"Earthquake or some strange ground movement in Las Vegas"

"HAARP Active @ 7.406Mhz Shortwave"

Seems like there's a connection, seen from my conspiratory eyes. Might just be me, though.


[edit on 5-4-2010 by David_Reale]


To add more fuel to this HAARP fire I posted this info in another thread also but I was listening to the radio today and didn't realize that Jessie Ventura actually moved very close to the epicenter of this quake



posted on Apr, 7 2010 @ 12:02 AM
link   
You post this....then we have the big earthquake in California the next day and 100 within 2 days. Could HAARP be controlling earthquakes to maybe regulate the shift in the Earth's crust due to the polar shifts?

"The Mexicali town on the border of U.S. and Mexico was hit hard by the Baja earthquake yesterday. The damage, while still being accessed has been coming in via pictures and the news media. Now there have been over 100 earthquakes in the San Diego and California area. Since there are so many going on at the moment, there are three names for the shaking: the Baja earthquake, the San Diego earthquake or even the Mexicali earthquake."

-celebs.gather.com...



posted on Apr, 7 2010 @ 12:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


I find the periods between the World wars in your graph pretty interesting. Yet until man, can tell me why and how gravity exists without a theory, I am open to all people's idea's.



posted on Apr, 7 2010 @ 07:36 AM
link   
95-98% of the posts in this thread have not mentioned or even come close to discussing Scalar or Longditudinal EM waves.

By debating transverse EM radio waves, HF, VHF, UHF and the rest you are isolating HAARPs abilities' to just a tiny part of the spectrum.

Phage, WW and the rest of the skeptics on this HAARP/other ionospheric heater/OTH radar issue, please do some research into scalar EM waves. Scalar is the keyword to comprehending what is really going on. This reaches into quantumn physics and beyond when you really get your nose into it - but it's well worth it, plus it could help you see a different picture in relation to HAARP. There's more to the EM spectrum than simply transverse waves.

Funnily enough, a pair of loudspeakers creating an interference pattern (one of the reasons music volume changes as you walk around a concert), is a very good visualisation for scalar/longditudinal wave inferiometry from two or more coils. Sound is a longditudinal wave using the very air molecules as a medium, where as scalar em waves use hyperspace.

[edit on 7/4/10 by GhostR1der]



posted on Apr, 7 2010 @ 09:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by GhostR1der
95-98% of the posts in this thread have not mentioned or even come close to discussing Scalar or Longditudinal EM waves.


That's because they don't exist, except within waveguides under certain circumstances. Propagating EM is always transverse.



Funnily enough, a pair of loudspeakers creating an interference pattern (one of the reasons music volume changes as you walk around a concert) is a very good visualisation for for scalar/longditudinal wave inferiometry from two or more coils. Sound is a longditudinal wave using the very air molecules as a medium, where as scalar waves use hyperspace.


Sound waves ARE longitudinal, so it makes sense that they exhibit that sort of behavior.

I know Bearden is all frothy at the mouth about scalar EM waves, but they're not real.

Now, if you go looking for the term "scalar", you'll find a bunch of hits, which I just know you'll come toss on here as a refutation from a legitimate (non Bearden) source. There are such things as scalar fields. A scalar field is a field of non-vector values. So a temperature map from your local weatherman is an example of a scalar field. But EM is not non-vector.

Tom actually thinks ALL EM is scalar, because that would mean that EM propagates in "aether", and he's an aether buff. But when you ask him "Hey Tom, explain polarization in EM waves, then" he starts yapping about cur dogs and runs off. He's actually a lot of fun to have lunch with, you'll never get a word in edgewise though.

Here's you an explanation

This is pretty thick. The issue is that Bearden and Evans want to jump into tensors and GR, so you have to disprove it there. Not being a GR specialist, I have to have a bunch of books open and slog through it myself to follow the arguments. Bearden is getting most of his stuff from Evans who actually IS a physicist, Tom hasn't got as much math as I do, so if I'm having a slog with it I'm betting he's not originating much of this, at least at the theory level. Sort of like Begich, Tom's doctorate is honorary. Evans doesn't agree with Bearden on everything, either, but you see them work together a lot.

That doesn't mean he isn't smart, he is, just sort of whacky. You ought to get some of his early stuff before he settled on his current gig - that Excalibur document is a hoot. (Zog?)

Some of his stuff is nuts in an interesting way, though. For example, the "Tom Sarcophagus" is sort of appealing in a oddball way. If you trudge through his website looking at the info on Priore and Tom's version of it with all his explanations of "cellular time engines" and the like, on a few of the slides is an unlabeled bit of graphics that gives away how he actually came up with it, and incidentally shows that he worked on a particular project set for the military, there's nowhere else that diagram comes from.

I've got about four projects on the speculative back burner that depend on the apparatus depicted in that diagram, it's a pain to implement. If I ever get it done, I think I'll set up one of Tom's boxes for fun.

[edit on 7-4-2010 by Bedlam]



new topics

top topics



 
82
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join