Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Strange Happenings on NSW Weather Radar Right Now

page: 10
42
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 06:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Wolf93308
 


So that's a good half dozen of us now who have said basically the same thing.

Thanks for the post!

Not everything is a conspiracy people!!




posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 07:05 AM
link   
Gee, don't let Julia see this, she will want to put a tax on it!!



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 07:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by Wolf93308
 


So that's a good half dozen of us now who have said basically the same thing.

Thanks for the post!

Not everything is a conspiracy people!!





Of course not *everything*is a conspiracy, but history has shown for thosands of years people conspire over and over and over again to gain ever more money and control over their fellow man working in all sorts of covert ways to bring this about.

Obviously, they attempt to keep these things hidden as they go about their attempts, it's naive to think they are going to usually post these things on the nightly news for all to see, covert and clandestine operations have to be researched and figured out by the masses if they are ever going to come to light.

I find it funny over and over so called 'debunker types' do aboslutely nothing to look into the true nature of clandestine operations, sitting there rather like a little kid wanting to be spoon fed, saying over and over, yeah that's not proof, I don't see anything there, no that's not proof either, nothing to see here move along, yada yada, doesn't really do much to aid any conversation or research, I don't know if some of those types here actually just have an obstuctionist close minded mindset or if rather they have more 'professional' biases. Would be good for this sight and the effort if they could find a way to make themselves a bit more usefull, IMHO.



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 07:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Tecumte
 




I find it funny over and over so called 'debunker types' do aboslutely nothing to look into the true nature of clandestine operations, sitting there rather like a little kid wanting to be spoon fed, saying over and over, yeah that's not proof, I don't see anything there, no that's not proof either, nothing to see here move along, yada yada, doesn't really do much to aid any conversation or research, I don't know if some of those types here actually just have an obstuctionist close minded mindset or if rather they have more 'professional' biases. Would be good for this sight and the effort if they could find a way to make themselves a bit more usefull, IMHO.




If this is meant to be a veiled attack or not I take offence to this comment because I almost always put effort into what I post and so do many other 'debunker types' here at ATS.

The above comment is showing your close mindedness if you ask me.

I could also say the flipside of this is true too, the 'believer types' enjoy being spoon fed BS from idiots on youtube without bothering to fact check things.



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 08:41 AM
link   
Hi there, i'm from Canada and i've seen last night on Daily Planet (Discovery channel) .

I've just catched the last 20seconds of the report and it seems to be a reflection of snow or rain or something like that.

I'm not an expert or anything but i tend to believe what they said.

Peace out.



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 08:42 AM
link   
reply to post by Tecumte
 


And if you're referring to me then you haven't been around here long enough...



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 08:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by Tecumte
 




I find it funny over and over so called 'debunker types' do aboslutely nothing to look into the true nature of clandestine operations, sitting there rather like a little kid wanting to be spoon fed, saying over and over, yeah that's not proof, I don't see anything there, no that's not proof either, nothing to see here move along, yada yada, doesn't really do much to aid any conversation or research, I don't know if some of those types here actually just have an obstuctionist close minded mindset or if rather they have more 'professional' biases. Would be good for this sight and the effort if they could find a way to make themselves a bit more usefull, IMHO.


If this is meant to be a veiled attack or not I take offence to this comment because I almost always put effort into what I post and so do many other 'debunker types' here at ATS.

The above comment is showing your close mindedness if you ask me.

I could also say the flipside of this is true too, the 'believer types' enjoy being spoon fed BS from idiots on youtube without bothering to fact check things.





Veiled??? How any links and what info have you and your 'debunker pals' posted DIRECTLY related to HAARP to give us all a better understanding of it. Obviously the military doesn't usually give out accurate info on it's weapons systems, nor do gov. sources for obvious reasons. Many of us here post not ONLY things from u-tube, but many critiques, articles, book links, patent research etc. etc. that will help people to get much closer to understanding it and remain open to it's potential because insiders usually have competeing motives.

I just don't see that willingness from 'debunker types' and I bet I'm FAR from being alone in nocticing they seem to be here (and only on a few 'sensitive' subjects) to direct people AWAY from actually looking into it and to try and downplay and ridicule such efforts. That's fine I guess, people usually ignore them and continue to look anyway, but why they waste so much time on just these potentially clandestine subjects seems to indicate to me they may have more reasons to do that than they suggest.
edit on 7-4-2011 by Tecumte because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 09:10 AM
link   
GobbledokTChipeater I don't see what the length of someones membership to this website has to with anything, other than ego...

are you suggesting that people aren't allowed to make comment or disagree with longer stayed members because they are new here? how silly, membership time here means nothing apart from the fact you have been a member longer

Some really interesting posts in this thread, and some absolutely terrible ones as well.

unfortunately this one is bad like a lot so far

hey ho

so back on topic - have a look at this

all im saying here is that they have the tech to do it, so why wouldn't they?



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 09:16 AM
link   
reply to post by doubledutch
 


No I am not saying that at all...

I am saying that if he/she thinks I am just another debunker then he/she hasn't done their homework and doesn't quite know what they're talking about.

I agree length of membership means little. Post content means more.



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 09:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by GobbledokTChipeater
reply to post by doubledutch
 


No I am not saying that at all...

I am saying that if he/she thinks I am just another debunker then he/she hasn't done their homework and doesn't quite know what they're talking about.

I agree length of membership means little. Post content means more.


cool, I must have misunderstood, sorry

yes membership means little and yes content of posts is what counts, my posts are generally crap and I contribute only a little, but I learn a lot!



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 09:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by doubledutch

all im saying here is that they have the tech to do it, so why wouldn't they?



They may have the tech, but what does anyone gain by making BoM radar show anomalous readings which everyone knows to be anomalous?

Unless it's nothing to do with BoM, but it was done by tptb knowing that such readings would eventually show up on conspiracy blogs and forums - and the whole idea is to see just how silly and paranoid some people can get?

Afraid of rainfall that doesn't exist?! Run for the hills ........



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 09:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tecumte

I just don't see that willingness from 'debunker types' and I bet I'm FAR from being alone in nocticing they seem to be here (and only on a few 'sensitive' subjects) to direct people AWAY from actually looking into it and to try and downplay and ridicule such efforts. That's fine I guess, people usually ignore them and continue to look anyway, but why they waste so much time on just these potentially clandestine subjects seems to indicate to me they may have more reasons to do that than they suggest.


In my experience the term 'debunker' is used all too quickly to shout down anyone who doesn't buy into a particular conspiracy theory. And usually, depressingly quickly, there follows a suggestion that they may even be 'professional' debunkers. It's not that they get much chance to even try for a rational argument.
The funny thing is that it's more likely to be the 'loony tunes' on conspiracy sites that are 'agents'! For one thing they discredit those who put forward well thought out, well researched theories.
As in above ---'seems to indicate to me they may have more reasons to do that than they suggest'.
Witness the paranoid mindset at work!



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 11:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by meathed
 


I don't see how.

Does it spinning clockwise make a difference to it spinning anti-clockwise? If so, please explain just how and why there is a difference.


Sorry just catching up.
Clock wise or anti clockwise makes one hell off a difference.
Why you ask??????......... Well........ i will tell you. As the weather pattern was spinning anti clockwise and the radar spins clockwise, ....well i thought that was odd

So thats why it makes a difference.
I hope i explained it to you



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 03:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Essan
(unlike some folk here going on about HAARP punching 'holes' in the ionosphere)

hmmm... maybe because we bother to read books...

The patent said:

"... large regions of the atmosphere could be lifted to an unexpectedly high altitude so that missiles encounter unexpected and unplanned drag forces with resultant destruction."

"Weather modification is possible by, for example, altering upper atmosphere wind patterns by constructing one or more plumes of atmospheric particles which will act as a lens or focusing device.
Angels Don't Play This HAARP
amazon to buy

Here is ONE of the patents:

4. The method of claim 1 wherein said threshold excitation of electron cyclotron resonance is about 1 watt per cubic centimeter and is sufficient to cause movement of a plasma region along said diverging magnetic field lines to an altitude higher than the altitude at which said excitation was initiated.


FIG. 2 is one embodiment within the present invention in which a selected region of plasma is raised to a higher altitude


Referring now to FIG. 2 a first ambodiment is illustrated where a selected region R 1 of plasma 12 is altered by electron cyclotron resonance heating to accelerate the electrons of plasma 12, which are following helical paths along field line 11.

To accomplish this result, electromagnetic radiation is transmitted at the outset, essentially parallel to line 11 via antenna 15 as right hand circularly polarized radiation wave 20. Wave 20 has a frequency which will excite electron cyclotron resonance with plasma 12 at its initial or original altitude. This frequency will vary depending on the electron cyclotron resonance of region R 1 which, in turn, can be determined from available data based on the altitudes of region R 1 , the particular field line 11 being used, the strength of the earth's magnetic field, etc. Frequencies of from about 20 to about 7200 kHz, preferably from about 20 to about 1800 kHz can be employed. Also, for any given application, there will be a threshhold (minimum power level) which is needed to produce the desired result. The minimum power level is a function of the level of plasma production and movement required, taking into consideration any loss processes that may be dominant in a particular plasma or propagation path.

As electron cyclotron resonance is established in plasma 12, energy is transferred from the electromagnetic radiation 20 into plasma 12 to heat and accelerate the electrons therein and, subsequently, ions and neutral particles. As this process continues, neutral particles which are present within R 1 are ionized and absorbed into plasma 12 and this increases the electron and ion densities of plasma 12. As the electron energy is raised to values of about 1 kilo electron volt (kev), the generated mirror force (explained below) will direct the excited plasma 12 upward along line 11 to form a plume R 2 at an altitude higher than that of R 1 .

Easier to read version but w/o pictures
Slower, but with the pictures
I notice the patent calls for a SPINNING region... hmmm... isn't there some spin in some of those pictures?



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 04:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by pianopraze

Originally posted by Essan
(unlike some folk here going on about HAARP punching 'holes' in the ionosphere)

hmmm... maybe because we bother to read books...


Well, I read Iain Banks books. But it doesn't mean I really think a conspiracy of ship Minds are behind it all


Or that I'm a Culture SC Agent. Though then again .......


But maybe having read books you can explain how HAARP increasing ionisation in the upper levels of the ionosphere causes false returns on ground level weather radar? Otherwise, isn't it totally irrelevant to the subject at hand?



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 10:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by starchild10

Originally posted by Tecumte

I just don't see that willingness from 'debunker types' and I bet I'm FAR from being alone in nocticing they seem to be here (and only on a few 'sensitive' subjects) to direct people AWAY from actually looking into it and to try and downplay and ridicule such efforts. That's fine I guess, people usually ignore them and continue to look anyway, but why they waste so much time on just these potentially clandestine subjects seems to indicate to me they may have more reasons to do that than they suggest.


In my experience the term 'debunker' is used all too quickly to shout down anyone who doesn't buy into a particular conspiracy theory. And usually, depressingly quickly, there follows a suggestion that they may even be 'professional' debunkers. It's not that they get much chance to even try for a rational argument.
The funny thing is that it's more likely to be the 'loony tunes' on conspiracy sites that are 'agents'! For one thing they discredit those who put forward well thought out, well researched theories.
As in above ---'seems to indicate to me they may have more reasons to do that than they suggest'.
Witness the paranoid mindset at work!


Whether it's the kept press, Operation Mockingbird (goggle the historical facts ) or some of those who work for the military or other alphabet soup agency (a nice post right here on ATS citing a MSM article) it's a fact that proffesional liars and ofuscators are now out on the net trying to discourage people from looking into 'state secrets'. No surprise here, the kept press has employed them for years, obviously as people gravitate to 'alternative media' to try and get away from the liars, they will follow.

Not saying just because people disagree and happen to believe most anything a person who seems to wear a white coat and has a piece of paper on the wall, that they are part of this, but c'mon you KNOW the type I'm talking about. They won't even bother to look at anything that doesn't come from an 'official source', and yes I know it can cut the other way too, but these 'debunker types' that I refer to don't ever bother to do any research *outside* the box and they try hard as hell to discourage and ridicule anyone that does.

Clandestine programs will rarely or never be handed to anyone on a silver platter it historically has taken much effort and a huge investment in time to find out any truth regarding such things and usually (but not always) by 'outsiders'.. Posting ONLY references from the very forces who are being looked at, and citing their evidence as 'fact' and all else that competes with it as 'conspiracy theory' that requires extra 'proof' is an extremely biased approach and isn't very usefull IMO in uncovering clandestine programs and things intended to be kept away from The People.



posted on Apr, 10 2011 @ 01:36 AM
link   
Hey, I don't want to bump a dead thread or hijack this from the aussies, but i also don't want to start a new thread cause it looks similar.

Everyone go check out the link at the bottom; right now on the NOAA Doppler radar page there's alot of weird circles over the east side of the US. Any info is appreciated.

Link: NOAA

MallardDuck
edit on 10-4-2011 by MallardDuck because: fixing late night typos.



posted on Apr, 10 2011 @ 10:11 AM
link   
reply to post by MallardDuck
 


I don't have a specific answer to your question other than the *obvious*, either the light gray circles are a normal artifact of radar function or they are picking up something. I state the obvious because that is really what these threads are all about regarding this subject.

I highly SUSPECT that in the cases where the rings become so blatantly pronouced like in the OP, that one plausible reason is that the metallic based aerosol/particulates said to be used in conjuction with weather mod. cause the radar signals to bounce back and forth between the radar and the metallic particles causing a feedback effect 'overloading' the system, somewhat in a way like the way a microphone and a PA will cause sound to produce feedback, a loop effect of sorts.



posted on Apr, 10 2011 @ 02:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tecumte
reply to post by MallardDuck
 


I don't have a specific answer to your question other than the *obvious*, either the light gray circles are a normal artifact of radar function or they are picking up something. I state the obvious because that is really what these threads are all about regarding this subject.



That's what i thought at first too, but as i watched i started to notice weird things. I don't have any of the earlier ones from when i was watching but i'll post the ones I do have.

The first one is off the NOAA site; it show's the weird circles, which could be interference, but they have weird lighter holes within them.



And the second one was from weather.com; this one has the interesting thing, it only showed it for one of the radar snap shots.



It looks to be in the same spot as the ones from the first photo, so it could very well be just radar interference; although i will say i never like looking at the weather.com radar because it's never very accurate of what i actually see. For instance, the current weather.com radar/clouds map says it's a clear skys where I'm at but it's overcast and grey.
edit on 10-4-2011 by MallardDuck because: Linked the same image twice...



posted on Apr, 10 2011 @ 02:26 PM
link   
What you're seeing is clear air mode of the radar. The faster the antenna rotation, the less sensitive it is. In the clear air mode, this is the slowest antenna rotation rate which permits the radar to sample a given volume of the atmosphere longer. So, when it's not raining, the radar is slowed down to give the highest resolution of the system. In the clear air mode, the radar will pick up dust, particulates and whatnot. What you're seeing is nothing more than the radar set in a too sensitive rotational mode. A lot of what you will see in clear air mode will be airborne dust and particulate matter. Also, snow does not reflect energy sent from the radar very well. Therefore, clear air mode will occasionally be used for the detection of light snow. In clear air mode, the radar products update every 10 minutes.

Hope that clears this up for you. Get it? Clear it up?
edit on 10-4-2011 by billxam because: added phrase





new topics

top topics



 
42
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join