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.

 

85% Drop in Serious Earthquakes since "Mobile HAARP" Went Offline in May ...

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 13 2011 @ 01:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by zuul000

Originally posted by 46ACE
So "SBX" is in port; so no earthquakes"?"


OMG "Proof!"

I'm going to be as polite as I can manage here:

Your logic sucks; it starts with a preconception. Using your reasoning it is just as valid I start the following thread
: " My cat got run over and since then 85% fewer earthquakes"...
One is not necessarily causing the other.


1. If you're talking to me as the OP, it's not my logic. I was just posting a link I found online. No editorial commentary was inserted by me. Do you understand how "the internet" works?


Of course I am:
So your "defense of your thread" is to ... uh...violate terms and conditions( "no comment"); then when questioned: throw your hands up " Hey; I didn't actually say "haarp causes earthquakes.... they implied it and the french also have a ship with a high powered radio transmitter just like the radio in Alaska.. so it causes earthquakes too."?



"Don't you mean to say: uh.... yeah maybe you've got a point?...there is no valid proof of a connection just self perpetuating internet babble"..

I find the topic full of fear mongering baseless techno babble by people who've never been anywhere near an RF spectrum analyzer...

I like most here can read english well above the "3rd grade" level.
I pointed out the false logic implied by the title. otherwise I'll' not play word games with you. I don't have a single dog in this fight. He died. funny;it hasn't rained since...
Goodnight..



Originally posted by zuul000

2. In the original article I didn't see any assertion that the radar is an "earthquake machine." Several statements were made and, as far as I can tell, each is 100% factual. If there is a specific one that is not you should point it out instead of rolling around on the ground in hysterics.


Sorry; its late I've had a long working weekend... hysterics is about all I care to invest right now.
You might want to watch that "crazy" term...


Originally posted by zuul000
Here are each of the sentences in the three-sentence article I linked:






Originally posted by zuul000


SBX has been accused by some of being a mobile version of, or complement to, the U.S. Navy’s Alaska-based High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP) which - itself - has been vaguely connected to the idea of artificially generated earthquakes.


Do you dispute that HAARP has been "accused by some"? This isn't saying "HAARP is" it is saying "HAARP has been accused by some." Do you dispute that?


Do you dispute the article assumes a connection between Haarp and earthquakes?



SBX has been in port since May 11 for routine maintenance, during which time only one earthquake of magnitude 6.5 has occurred, according to the U.S. Geological Survey.


Do you dispute that (1) SBX has been in port since May 11, or, do you dispute that (2) one 6.5+ earthquake has occurred since May 11? With which statement do you take umbrage?



An average of seven earthquakes of magnitude 6.5 occurred each month in the preceding part of 2011.


Do you dispute this?

And that's the end of the article.

If you choose to "read between the lines" or "make inferences" that's your choice. Don't berate others because you are looking for a conspiracy theory to debunk. There's none here. Please make the choice to behave in a rational and lucid manner and dial the crazy down to about a 7. Thank you.
edit on 12-6-2011 by zuul000 because: (no reason given)

edit on 13-6-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 13-6-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 13 2011 @ 02:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by 46ACE

Originally posted by zuul000

Originally posted by 46ACE
So "SBX" is in port; so no earthquakes"?"


OMG "Proof!"

I'm going to be as polite as I can manage here:

Your logic sucks; it starts with a preconception. Using your reasoning it is just as valid I start the following thread
: " My cat got run over and since then 85% fewer earthquakes"...
One is not necessarily causing the other.


1. If you're talking to me as the OP, it's not my logic. I was just posting a link I found online. No editorial commentary was inserted by me. Do you understand how "the internet" works?


Of course I am:
So your "defense of your thread" is to ... uh...violate terms and conditions( "no comment"); then when questioned: throw your hands up " Hey; I didn't actually say "haarp causes earthquakes.... they implied it and the french also have a ship with a high powered radio transmitter just like the radio in Alaska.. so it causes earthquakes too."?



"Don't you mean to say: uh.... yeah maybe you've got a point?...there is no valid proof of a connection just self perpetuating internet babble"..

I find the topic full of fear mongering baseless techno babble by people who've never been anywhere near an RF spectrum analyzer...

I like most here can read english well above the "3rd grade" level.
I pointed out the false logic implied by the title. otherwise I'll' not play word games with you. I don't have a single dog in this fight. He died. funny;it hasn't rained since...
Goodnight..



Originally posted by zuul000

2. In the original article I didn't see any assertion that the radar is an "earthquake machine." Several statements were made and, as far as I can tell, each is 100% factual. If there is a specific one that is not you should point it out instead of rolling around on the ground in hysterics.


Sorry; its late I've had a long working weekend... hysterics is about all I care to invest right now.
You might want to watch that "crazy" term...


Originally posted by zuul000
Here are each of the sentences in the three-sentence article I linked:






Originally posted by zuul000


SBX has been accused by some of being a mobile version of, or complement to, the U.S. Navy’s Alaska-based High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP) which - itself - has been vaguely connected to the idea of artificially generated earthquakes.


Do you dispute that HAARP has been "accused by some"? This isn't saying "HAARP is" it is saying "HAARP has been accused by some." Do you dispute that?


Do you dispute the article assumes a connection between Haarp and earthquakes?



SBX has been in port since May 11 for routine maintenance, during which time only one earthquake of magnitude 6.5 has occurred, according to the U.S. Geological Survey.


Do you dispute that (1) SBX has been in port since May 11, or, do you dispute that (2) one 6.5+ earthquake has occurred since May 11? With which statement do you take umbrage?



An average of seven earthquakes of magnitude 6.5 occurred each month in the preceding part of 2011.


Do you dispute this?


I would love to have you reply to my three rather simple questions rather than engage in name-calling and chest-thumping.

When one side in a discussion chooses to stand on a crate and scream loud accusations there's really no basis for a rational dialog. Don't you agree? I'm sure you do.


Originally posted by 46ACEI find the topic full of fear mongering baseless techno babble by people who've never been anywhere near an RF spectrum analyzer...


Are we reading the same thread? I haven't seen any technical terms used at any point. All of the verbiage I've read has been very simple, non-technical English.

I'm sorry this thread has made you so terribly upset. I truly do hope you feel better soon. I would love to enjoy your participation in this thread when you've been able to calm down a little bit.

Thanks!



posted on Jun, 13 2011 @ 02:46 AM
link   


I pointed out the false logic implied by the title. otherwise


There was no "false logic implied" by the title of this thread. One cannot "imply" logic at all. Logic is the formation of argumentation. The statement -

"85% Drop in Serious Earthquakes Since Mobile HAARP Went Offline in May"

- is 100% accurate. If you choose to extrapolate a conclusion from that fact, that is your conclusion. Please do not assign that to me as my belief. If you're going to engage in this irrational conspiracy-mongering, I would like the opportunity to engage you in a similar way to which you've engaged me. Here I go ...

You said you had a long working weekend. I reject your obvious inference that a breakdown in the space-time continuum occurred this weekend which caused you to experience time at a slower rate. I am very mad. I am a strong man who drives a Dodge Stratus. I make love to many beautiful women on a regular basis. You will respect me. Stop talking in techno-babble.

edit on 13-6-2011 by zuul000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 13 2011 @ 07:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by zuul000

Originally posted by adeclerk
Why does the geo-engineering forum allow this garbage to be posted?
edit on 6/12/11 by adeclerk because: (no reason given)


True - we really should stick to sound science like discussion about a secret global conspiracy to spray poison chemtrails. Not this garbage. Great point. Starred!


edit on 12-6-2011 by zuul000 because: (no reason given)

I can understand, in a way, why people initially believe in chemjunk (they notice some persistent contrails for the first time, even though they've been there). None of the HAARP conspiracies are even remotely believable, maybe for the gullible? Have a read on the actual power of HAARP, incidentally in my thread.



posted on Jun, 13 2011 @ 10:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by adeclerk

Originally posted by zuul000

Originally posted by adeclerk
Why does the geo-engineering forum allow this garbage to be posted?
edit on 6/12/11 by adeclerk because: (no reason given)


True - we really should stick to sound science like discussion about a secret global conspiracy to spray poison chemtrails. Not this garbage. Great point. Starred!


edit on 12-6-2011 by zuul000 because: (no reason given)

I can understand, in a way, why people initially believe in chemjunk (they notice some persistent contrails for the first time, even though they've been there). None of the HAARP conspiracies are even remotely believable, maybe for the gullible? Have a read on the actual power of HAARP, incidentally in my thread.


I'm sorry this topic has you so terribly upset. I hope you are able to resolve that.

I look forward to your participation in this thread once you've managed to calm yourself down to the point that you can rationalize a statement to which others can engage or respond ("thaz dum, ur dum lol - read my thread instead" is a difficult conversation point; also posting content-less messages in a thread just to promote your own is a TOS violation).

Take care; I truly hope you feel better soon.
edit on 13-6-2011 by zuul000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 13 2011 @ 11:37 PM
link   
I note that yesterday's 6.3 earthquake in Christchurch, New Zealand, would not counts as a "Serious Earthquake" under the criteria used in the title of this thread, nor would the one on February 22 that was also 6.3 and did a great deal of damge to the city, killing about 160 ppl - en.wikipedia.org...

but the one there on 4 September of 2010 - 7.1 magnitude - which did little damage, would be - en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Jun, 13 2011 @ 11:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by zuul000

Originally posted by adeclerk

Originally posted by zuul000

Originally posted by adeclerk
Why does the geo-engineering forum allow this garbage to be posted?
edit on 6/12/11 by adeclerk because: (no reason given)


True - we really should stick to sound science like discussion about a secret global conspiracy to spray poison chemtrails. Not this garbage. Great point. Starred!


edit on 12-6-2011 by zuul000 because: (no reason given)

I can understand, in a way, why people initially believe in chemjunk (they notice some persistent contrails for the first time, even though they've been there). None of the HAARP conspiracies are even remotely believable, maybe for the gullible? Have a read on the actual power of HAARP, incidentally in my thread.


I'm sorry this topic has you so terribly upset. I hope you are able to resolve that.

I look forward to your participation in this thread once you've managed to calm yourself down to the point that you can rationalize a statement to which others can engage or respond ("thaz dum, ur dum lol - read my thread instead" is a difficult conversation point; also posting content-less messages in a thread just to promote your own is a TOS violation).

Take care; I truly hope you feel better soon.
edit on 13-6-2011 by zuul000 because: (no reason given)

Maybe you can read there and compare the low power of HAARP to the even lower power of this "mobile HAARP". But alas, you won't. You believe in the HAARP conspiracies, I really doubt evidence will sway you.



posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 02:30 PM
link   
Hello
This is my first post to ATS after a few months lurking on the excellent site.

I am very concerned about an article today in the British press, which was one of the most read by British Public today online today, but not sure if the public are really intune what might be going on. See Below. After reading article I did a quick search on earthquakes in UK, not so common to be reported and immediately there was one in the area, worst since 1780! . Now within a short radius of this site is the Sellafied Nuclear recycling facility plus a dense urban community of Manchester, Liverpool. A eruption disrupting this site could cause horrendous outcome for area, and for UK, Europe,(fukishima style) Your thoughts, collective wisdom on this is appreciated. Hoping it is innocence non-related but growing evidence seems to supportive more possible sinister objectives..

Tiny village is latest victim of the 'The hum'
www.telegraph.co.uk...

Quake is biggest since 1780 (From The Northern Echo)
3 Jan 2011 ... The earthquake, which struck at 9.02pm, was felt as far away as County Durham, Cumbria and West Yorkshire. A seismologist from the BGS ...
www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/.../8767269.Earthquake_strikes_in_North_ Yorkshire

Now a tiny English village is the latest community to claim to be being hit by the phenomenon known as "the hum". Residents of Woodland, in County Durham, claim that every night a noise permeates the air similar to the throb of a car engine. It is sometimes so strong that it even shakes the bed of one of the householders.
But no matter how hard they look, the community cannot find the source of the problem and, at their wits end, have called in the council to investigate.
The 300-strong population is the latest around the world to be hit by the rumble which has in the past led to wild conspiracy theories blaming it on UFOs, government experiments and abandoned mine shafts.
It is so widespread that it has even featured on the television show The X Files.
Its most famous occurrence was in Bristol in the 1970s when more than a thousand people complained of the consistent drone causing nosebleeds, sleeplessness and headaches.
It vanished as mysteriously as it arrived and was never explained.
Residents of Woodland, a community consisting of one main street surrounded by farmland, claims their version of "the hum" is constant from midnight until 4am every night and stops them sleeping.
There are no pylons, factories or abandoned mines nearby.
The noise started about two months ago and has been plaguing the isolated village every day since.
Marylin Grech, 57, a retired store detective, said: "In certain areas of the house you can hear it more loudly. It is definitely from outside, it's in the air, all around, very faint.
"It vibrates through the house. We've turned all the electricity off in the house and we can still hear it, so it's not that.
"Sometimes we'll be in bed and it vibrates right through our bed, like a throbbing.
"It's not tinnitus, that's a high pitched sound and this is very low. If I put my fingers in my ears it stops, so I know it's not in my head.
"At 4am it's so clear, because we live in such an isolated place with no traffic, it's heaven.
"But it leaves a buzzing in your head for the rest of the day."
Gary Hutchinson, an environmental protection manager at Durham County Council, said: "I can confirm that we received a call regarding a humming sound in the Woodland area earlier on June 1 and we will now make further enquiries before deciding what action we will take."



posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 04:48 PM
link   
Clearly caused by HAARP - can't possibly be anything else...en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 07:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
I note that yesterday's 6.3 earthquake in Christchurch, New Zealand, would not counts as a "Serious Earthquake" under the criteria used in the title of this thread, nor would the one on February 22 that was also 6.3 and did a great deal of damge to the city, killing about 160 ppl - en.wikipedia.org...

but the one there on 4 September of 2010 - 7.1 magnitude - which did little damage, would be - en.wikipedia.org...


It sounds like you subscribe to, or are interested in, a paranoid conspiracy theory where a government cabal is engineering earthquakes to create havoc and destruction, versus mild/latent interest in what unintended consequences applications of new technology may portend.

I hope you are able to apply greater skills of reason, logic and sound judgment in your life moving forward. I can assure you, no one is out to get you, there are no secret groups of villains tracking your movements. Everything is OK.



posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 07:20 PM
link   
reply to post by zuul000
 


Do you even realize how much energy is released in an earthquake?



posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 07:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by adeclerk

Originally posted by zuul000

Originally posted by adeclerk

Originally posted by zuul000

Originally posted by adeclerk
Why does the geo-engineering forum allow this garbage to be posted?
edit on 6/12/11 by adeclerk because: (no reason given)


True - we really should stick to sound science like discussion about a secret global conspiracy to spray poison chemtrails. Not this garbage. Great point. Starred!


edit on 12-6-2011 by zuul000 because: (no reason given)

I can understand, in a way, why people initially believe in chemjunk (they notice some persistent contrails for the first time, even though they've been there). None of the HAARP conspiracies are even remotely believable, maybe for the gullible? Have a read on the actual power of HAARP, incidentally in my thread.


I'm sorry this topic has you so terribly upset. I hope you are able to resolve that.

I look forward to your participation in this thread once you've managed to calm yourself down to the point that you can rationalize a statement to which others can engage or respond ("thaz dum, ur dum lol - read my thread instead" is a difficult conversation point; also posting content-less messages in a thread just to promote your own is a TOS violation).

Take care; I truly hope you feel better soon.
edit on 13-6-2011 by zuul000 because: (no reason given)

Maybe you can read there and compare the low power of HAARP to the even lower power of this "mobile HAARP". But alas, you won't. You believe in the HAARP conspiracies, I really doubt evidence will sway you.


Once again, I'm very, very, sorry this thread has caused you to become so terribly upset. I'm not certain exactly why you're so hysterical but I empathize with you.

I would appreciate it, however, if you do not "assign" beliefs to me. I have never indicated a belief, or even interest, in conspiracy theories. I didn't link to an article that did. In fact, the Link-Within summary of the article on the website I cited says:




85% drop in serious earthquakes since US Navy SBX radar went in for maintenance on May 11. Coincidence? Probably. t.co... #haarp


I'm certain you didn't read that, though. You feel like conspiracy theorists are out to get you and you are fighting a one-man uphill battle to keep sanity at bay. You feel like you are the only sane one in a world conspiring against you. This necessitates your action of immediately lashing out with growls and barbed teeth at any hint or whiff of something you think may be part of this cabal tormenting you.

I really do hope you feel better soon.



posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 07:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by adeclerk
reply to post by zuul000
 


Do you even realize how much energy is released in an earthquake?


yes, 3

(ask a ridiculously broad question, get a ridiculously broad answer)

Listen, I understand you feel tormented by this thread. I hope you can take a few deep breaths and relax and not let your hysteria get the most of you. We're all here to have a fun, casual discussion. No one is out to get you. There is no conspiracy trying to torment you. If this thread is causing you to become so hysterical, perhaps you should consider taking a break until you can interact in a slightly calmer and more rational way? Just a thought. Thanks - have a great day!
edit on 14-6-2011 by zuul000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 07:48 PM
link   
reply to post by zuul000
 


This link in the article is a primary reason I am taking offense, it is a blatant misrepresentation of readily available information. Those charts (you can even see where it says "magnetometer" at the top) have nothing to do with HAARP's activity, they're a measurement of the Earth's magnetic field.

Why did you feel the need to post this garbage if you don't even believe it?



posted on Jun, 14 2011 @ 07:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by zuul000

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
I note that yesterday's 6.3 earthquake in Christchurch, New Zealand, would not counts as a "Serious Earthquake" under the criteria used in the title of this thread, nor would the one on February 22 that was also 6.3 and did a great deal of damge to the city, killing about 160 ppl - en.wikipedia.org...

but the one there on 4 September of 2010 - 7.1 magnitude - which did little damage, would be - en.wikipedia.org...


It sounds like you subscribe to, or are interested in, a paranoid conspiracy theory where a government cabal is engineering earthquakes to create havoc and destruction, versus mild/latent interest in what unintended consequences applications of new technology may portend.


Hey settle down dude - no need for the hysteria - I'm just posting some facts for information and interest's sake - do you actually dispute any of the facts I posted?

I wouldn't mind a pleasant, emotionaless discussion about the information if it is of interest to you - but screaming off on conspiracy tangents isn't conducive to civilised chat.

Why get all up tight - I thought you were all OK with posting facts and not making interpretations of them??

Of cours if you don't want to actually discuss the facts and figures that's OK too - I wasn't actually saying anyone should or has to.


I hope you are able to apply greater skills of reason, logic and sound judgment in your life moving forward. I can assure you, no one is out to get you, there are no secret groups of villains tracking your movements. Everything is OK.


How do you get such a comprehensive view of my psyche??

I think perhaps YOU are actually surveilling me at this moment - is that you in the office on the other side of the atrium and down 1 level perving at me??




edit on 14-6-2011 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 08:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by adeclerk
reply to post by zuul000
 


This link in the article is a primary reason I am taking offense, it is a blatant misrepresentation of readily available information. Those charts (you can even see where it says "magnetometer" at the top) have nothing to do with HAARP's activity, they're a measurement of the Earth's magnetic field.

Why did you feel the need to post this garbage if you don't even believe it?


I understood the link to be an affirmation of the statement "SBX has been accused by some." You'll find, as you grow your level of internet literacy and general reading comprehension, that linking to another site serves as a citation of the hyperlinked text. In this sense the statement "SBX has been accused by some" is cited by the link. It does not mean the article is asserting or endorsing the content of the link, it's merely evidencing that "someone" has made the "accusation."

I'm very sorry you are having difficulty following along. If there's anything I can do to help smooth this process for you, please do let me know. I'm aggrieved that you've worked yourself up into such a hysterical anger. I hope you are able to find some level of calm and comfort soon.



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 08:38 PM
link   
adeclerk - John Ronson wrote a great book a few years back called "Them." In it, he followed a variety of conspiracy theorists around the globe - David Icke, Jim Marrs, et. al. - and documented their goings on. No one - no lucid or rational person - ever accused John Ronson of being a conspiracy theorist. However, some of us - motivated by healthy intellectual curiosity - are interested in fringe or outside mainstream ideas from the perspective of the impact it has on the world around us. That doesn't mean we believe them, it means we are interested in how they act and interplay on the human condition at large.

The great American theologian Huston Smith is an expert in Australian aboriginal religion. That doesn't mean he believes in - or practices - any aspect of Australian aboriginal religion, it means he is interested in it.

As you intellectually mature you may come to understand this. I hope you are able to calm down and empower yourself to take a break from this thread until this maturation process has completed.

Have a great day!



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 09:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by zuul000
I understood the link to be an affirmation of the statement "SBX has been accused by some."

Alright, so why did you link to it, without any comment from yourself (in violation of this sites terms and conditions) in the geo-engineering forum, no less? Post speculation in the speculation forums.

Originally posted by zuul000
You'll find, as you grow your level of internet literacy and general reading comprehension, that linking to another site serves as a citation of the hyperlinked text. In this sense the statement "SBX has been accused by some" is cited by the link. It does not mean the article is asserting or endorsing the content of the link, it's merely evidencing that "someone" has made the "accusation."

Gee, thanks. I really should be more careful, I might actually believe some of the bunk posted around here.

Originally posted by zuul000
I'm very sorry you are having difficulty following along. If there's anything I can do to help smooth this process for you, please do let me know. I'm aggrieved that you've worked yourself up into such a hysterical anger. I hope you are able to find some level of calm and comfort soon.

Tell me why you posted the article and what your take on it is, wouldn't want to violate the T&C, now would we.



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 09:37 PM
link   
reply to post by zuul000
 


Erroneous, if you post something about speculation of a device being used to create earthquakes, in the geo-engineering forum with links to other sites that state more affirmative things about HAARP while deliberately misrepresenting data from the Induction Magnetometer at HAARP, without so much as a word of your own opinion on the article, what do you expect people to think your position is?



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 01:30 AM
link   
should hear about japan and haarp.... look up on google or youtube

Mod Note: One Line Post – Please Review This Link.

edit on 23-6-2011 by Gemwolf because: (no reason given)



new topics




 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join