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.
One of the primary researchers in this area is Friedemann Freund, of NASA Ames. He has written several articles introducing the concept of ionospheric and atmospheric changes as earthquake precursors:
This research is still young and apparently controverial. If there are effects, they may be too subtle for the SID instruments to pick up. If your students do pursue something of this nature, make sure you make it VERY clear to them that this is extremely early and tentative research that may or may not provide them any useful results. If your students do want to explore this, remind them that the epicenter of a potential earthquake would have to lie somewhere "near" the line between the transmitter and their receiver. (And we have no idea what distances might qualify as "near.") Thus they would need to track data from all over the world and, if something irregular were noted, they would need to triangulate to determine the location of the potential earthquake. Best approach might be to pick a recent earthquake then check the SID data from stations around the world to see if any changes were noticed at, before, or after, that time.
Two versions of the monitor exist - one simple and low-cost, named SID, and one research quality, called AWESOME
The Space Weather Monitor program is an education project to build and distribute inexpensive ionospheric monitors to students around the world. The monitors detect solar flares and other ionospheric disturbances. Two versions of the monitor exist - one simple and low-cost, named SID, and one research quality, called AWESOME.
Earth's ionosphere reacts strongly to the intense x-ray and ultraviolet radiation released by the Sun during a solar event. By using a receiver to monitor the signal strength from distant VLF transmitters, and noting unusual changes as the waves bounce off the ionosphere, students around the world can directly monitor and track these Sudden Ionospheric Disturbances (SIDs).
You didn't answer my question so I'll ask again. Stronger and more effective than what? TV? TV uses a higher frequency than HAARP. And by the way, high doesn't mean stronger and more effective, it means high. In some cases lower frequencies travel further than higher frequencies. If you want to talk about how strong an antenna emission is, power (in watts) would be one measure you could use.
Originally posted by LoveisanArt
I capiltized HIGH, to emphasis that the H in HAARP stands for HIGH. Which is obviously a reference to stronger and more effective frequencies.
I probably know more about this than 99% of the general population, but less than the researchers working on HAARP. I mentioned high school not because of my own experience, but because I know that the majority of ATSers have at least a high school education and therefore these high school concepts like the inverse square law should be within the grasp of most ATSers to understand. You did make a valid point about the effects of different frequencies taking some time to master so we can't expect everyone to master that understanding in a short time...I agree with you on that point.
You talk about applying ideas to your life which you learned from HIGHschool ( ).. but how much experience do you have your working and researchin with frequencies.
He asked a valid question, about how they would aim the "weapon", which so far you have only responded to with an insult. Perhaps it could have been asked a little more politely, but it wasn't all that sarcastic...in fact I read it as a serious question, to which I tried to help provide an answer when discussing the inverse square law. Maybe you should consider the question a serious one rather than a sarcastic one and try to answer it.
The last poster I "insulted" clearly showcased his intelligence publicly, and then added his own tablespoon of sarcasm, so I simply points out his intellect and gave him a tablespoon back
This has nothing to do with sound waves. There are technical differences in the behavior of sound waves and EM waves.
Sorry if I hurt fealings, I am looking for constructive ideas and responses, not short sarcastic posts that immediately disagree with the headline.. I have given evidence of frequencies and there effect on matter. There is libraries of research to be done on sound frequency and how it effects matter, you can do a 2 hour google search and come up with loads of facts containing sound wave manipulation.
So if you've already made your mind up, perhaps you shouldn't have asked for feedback when you presented your idea in the OP. My hope is that some people who haven't already made their mind up but are willing to examine logical arguments from both sides of the debate will see this and take these facts into consideration when they decide what's real. I was hoping you were such an open-minded person when I saw you ask for feedback in your OP, but now you're saying you're not?
Is everything is in forms of waves, and matter is made of vibrating photons and other sub atomic particles, and frequencies influence and affect both... then what is HAARP up too my friend?
Make your mind up about HAARP, I have made mine up, now Im trying to show others what I see. With or without highschool logic
A mackerel sky or buttermilk sky is an indicator of moisture (the cloud) and instability (the cirrus-cumulus form) at intermediate levels (2400–6100 m, 8000-20,000 ft). If the lower atmosphere is stable and no moist air moves in, the weather will most likely remain dry. However, moisture at lower levels combined with surface temperature instability can lead to rainshowers or thunderstorms should the rising moist air reach this layer. In the winter it is often said to precede snowstorms and flurries.
Mackerel sky (ger: Schaefchenwolken; fr: nuages moutonneux)
is a popular term for a sky covered with extensive cirrocumulus or altocumulus clouds arranged in somewhat regular waves and showing blue sky in the gaps. The pattern resembles the scales on a mackerel, thus, the name. In Germany and France they are known as 'sheep cloud', as their pattern resembles a flock of sheep, also they are sometimes called buttermilk sky, regionally.
Some people just need libraries of "evidence" and research to admit what is infront of their eyes. Its evident that there are crazy cloud patterns and formations in the past decade, which Im sure havent been recorded in more recent decades.. disruption via concentrated frequency of Haarp will do that.
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by LoveisanArt
There is libraries of research to be done on sound frequency and how it effects matter, you can do a 2 hour google search and come up with loads of facts containing sound wave manipulation.
HAARP does not produce sound. It produces electromagnetic radiation.
Sound and electromagnetic radiation are not the same thing. Sound is longitudinal waves which propagate through a medium. It is a mechanical wave. A compression wave.
Electromagnetic radiation propagates as transverse waves consisting of an oscillating magnetic field and an oscillating electrical field. Electromagnetic radiation requires no medium.
This is very basic physics.
www.mediacollege.com...
www.youtube.com...
Pictures of clouds is not evidence of manipulation of any sort.edit on 8/10/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)
I refuse to listen? Did you read the quotes you gave?
They were bullsh*t explanations that any ignorant sheep would accept because someone who is a "professional" gave them
Have you tried experimenting with this concept you have provided? Creating your own mini atmosphere, and creating these patterns of clouds? I have a strong feeling you havent and just read this bogus and applied it to your small library mind
Never have I said HAARP is "creating" clouds. Im stating that the frequencies applied to the atmosphere are affecting cloud formations, causing such bizzare patterns in clouds and weather. You and Phage have only given bogus mainstream science explanations. Which is not enough to accept from someone with a sheep-less mind. Unlike you my friend, I will not belive anything just because it has a smart ring to it..
It's 180 antennas. The radiation is not really concentrated, in fact is is diffused quite a lot. But yes, it is the ionosophere, 10s of miles above the part of the atmosphere in which weather occurs. It is able to affect that region because, instead of air, it is composed of plasma (charged particles). The lower atmosphere is composed of neutral particles which the HF radiation has no effect on.
So you are saying that Electromagnetic Radiation cannot affect the atmosphere? 360 attennas concentrated at the same spot of the ionsphere, and blasting it with electromagnetic radiation will have no affect on anything in the atmosphere Phage-master?
Yes. Yes it is.
If that is the truth, then this case is closed.
What's an electricmagnetic field?
You know your heart generates its own Electricmagnetic field Phage
Originally posted by tsurfer2000h
reply to post by LoveisanArt
Some people just need libraries of "evidence" and research to admit what is infront of their eyes. Its evident that there are crazy cloud patterns and formations in the past decade, which Im sure havent been recorded in more recent decades.. disruption via concentrated frequency of Haarp will do that.
You do know that sailors used the clouds to help predict what weather was heading their way before they had weather reports,don't you?
And can you actually provide any evidence that can show HAARP is capable of doing what you claim it can do?
1. A high power transmitter and antenna array operating in the High Frequency (HF) range. The transmitter is capable of delivering up to 3.6 million Watts to an antenna system consisting of 180 crossed dipole antennas arranged as a rectangular, planar array.
I checked the site several hours later and played a loop of the radar which was on the site at that time. The radar confirmed the image abvove and showed the ring fading but still visible over a period of a couple of hours.
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by LoveisanArt
It's 180 antennas. The radiation is not really concentrated, in fact is is diffused quite a lot. But yes, it is the ionosophere, 10s of miles above the part of the atmosphere in which weather occurs. It is able to affect that region because, instead of air, it is composed of plasma (charged particles). The lower atmosphere is composed of neutral particles which the HF radiation has no effect on.
So you are saying that Electromagnetic Radiation cannot affect the atmosphere? 360 attennas concentrated at the same spot of the ionsphere, and blasting it with electromagnetic radiation will have no affect on anything in the atmosphere Phage-master?
Yes. Yes it is.
If that is the truth, then this case is closed.
What's an electricmagnetic field?
You know your heart generates its own Electricmagnetic field Phage
edit on 8/10/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)
Unless I was working for them or eye-witnessing this, I wouldnt take it out of a book or from an article on the internet.