Is HAARP feeding SANDY? (The Conspiracy Side)

reply to post by BrieBird

Lets' say HAARP could push a portion of the ionosphere up. Wouldn't plasma from around the region be pulled into it? Wouldn't that be the path of least resistance? I mean, to be pulled up, air would have to go against the force of gravity but to go "sideways" it wouldn't.

I'm not sure ionospheric convection is caused by the bit of heat that HAARP produces. Not sure such low density is subject to much convective activity due to heating.

reply to post by Phage


I am not sure either, I have no experience with that type of science to honostly answer with any conviction. In my frame of limited knowledge about how vacuums are created I only said that it could be plausible.

reply to post by Phage

Let's start over.

You can if you want... won't make you any more right...

1 joule = 2.77777778e-7 kilowatt hours www.calculateme.com...

5.2e19 joules = 1.4444444444e+13 kWh

Nuke sub output = 100,000kW

1.4444444444e13 kWh / 100,000 kw = 1.44e8 hours

That's all very pretty, but its meaningless.

1,444,444.44 sub hours of operation to produce 1% of the required power.

1% of the required power for *WHAT* Phage?

FOR WHAT?

I was wrong.

That's never stopped you from claiming that you were right before.

reply to post by Phage

You have not said anything to indicate that a hurricane is steered by ocean temperatures.

See what I mean about claiming that you were right when you are not?

(second line)

reply to post by wmd_2008

What a whole load of BS assumptions way to go , what is an average size hurricane? were your cartoon worked out the mass, subs with your top secret antenna any proof?, then the assumption that all the power from the subs reactor could be converted to energy through the antenna

Are you assuming that my calculations were assumptions?

Would you like to provide your own evidance against my claims?

Or were you just going to shout "YOO IZ TEH WRONG" and hope everyone payed attention to you for no reason?

Because as it stands so far... you have not backed up your position, while I have.

GOOD DAY TO YOU.

reply to post by Zaphod58

It has nothing to do with trying to kill a thread. It has to do with accurate information, and the fact that I've known many of their crews. They deserve the credit, and the respect that they've earned for flying into those storms. I've seen the condition of their aircraft when they've come back from a few of them, and it hasn't been pretty.

Well, far be it from me to not give credit where credit is due.

You still haven't answered my question about what kind of aircraft they flew, though..... convenient omission?

reply to post by BrieBird

You also need to consider that unlike the lower regions of the atmosphere, the ionosphere tends to become more dense with altitude until you get to about 300km or so. So, unlike in the lower atmosphere, a parcel of "air" moving upward would become compressed by the surrounding "air" rather than expanding into the lower pressure.

Also, at around 90 km there is a temperature inversion, where temperatures increase with altitude.

These would tend to indicate that there isn't much thermal convection in the ionosphere.

www.windows2universe.org...
www.physics.usyd.edu.au...

reply to post by ErtaiNaGia

1% of the required power for *WHAT* Phage?

1% of the power necessary to feed a hurricane for a day.

See what I mean about claiming that you were right when you are not?

I do. You claimed that a hurricane can be steered by heating the ocean to create a trail of water vapor. You have not demonstrated that. You have provided no evidence that hurricanes are steered by anything but wind flow created by large scale weather systems.

reply to post by Phage

1% of the power necessary to feed a hurricane for a day.

So you admit that you were strawmanning my position then?

I do. You claimed that a hurricane can be steered by heating the ocean to create a trail of water vapor. You have not demonstrated that. You have provided no evidence that hurricanes are steered by anything but wind flow created by large scale weather systems.

The fact that you require evidence to understand what is plainly obvious is not my problem, phage.



Clearly, even a relatively small amount of water vapour at high altitudes is enough to create cloud formation.

Clearly they pay you too much.

reply to post by ErtaiNaGia

So you admit that you were strawmanning my position then?

No. I was addressing your position on the energy requirements.

The fact that you require evidence to understand what is plainly obvious is not my problem

But you do seem to have a problem explaining why a hurricane would follow a trail of warm water. You haven't made it plainly obvious. You didn't explain why, if that were the case, a hurricane would ever leave a region of warm water and move into cooler waters.

Clearly, even a relatively small amount of water vapour at high altitudes is enough to create cloud formation.

Just to be clear...I don't want you to claim I'm setting up a strawman...are you saying that a cirrus cloud is a storm? Are you saying that a cumulus cloud is a storm? Are you saying that a hurricane is just a cloud formation?

Clearly they pay you too much.

Ah yes. The "agent" defense. Perfect.

Originally posted by BrieBird
reply to post by wmd_2008

 

A vacuum is a void so by pushing the ionishere up it would create a void and thus that void would be filled by a rushing of air. Seems plausable to me.

Except that isn't what happens.

The depth of the ionosphere varies considerably through the year and indeed through the day, due to Earth's orbit and the amount of ultraviolet radiation reaching it from the Sun. Whether or not ions in the atmosphere are charged (forming the ionosphere) or not, does not affect atmospheric pressure below.

Ionosphere 101

The idea that charging ions causes the atmosphere to 'rise' is simply based on total ignorance of what the ionosphere is.

Originally posted by Phage
The fact that you require evidence to understand what is plainly obvious is not my problem

But you do seem to have a problem explaining why a hurricane would follow a trail of warm water. You haven't made it plainly obvious. You didn't explain why, if that were the case, a hurricane would ever leave a region of warm water and move into cooler waters.

Just to add to that, a cyclone will intensify as it moves over warmer water, and decrease over colder water, but the SSTs have no bearing on the track the cyclone takes. This is largely determined by the position of surrounding blocks of high pressure.

Originally posted by ErtaiNaGia
reply to post by wmd_2008

 

What a whole load of BS assumptions way to go , what is an average size hurricane? were your cartoon worked out the mass, subs with your top secret antenna any proof?, then the assumption that all the power from the subs reactor could be converted to energy through the antenna

Are you assuming that my calculations were assumptions?

Would you like to provide your own evidance against my claims?

Or were you just going to shout "YOO IZ TEH WRONG" and hope everyone payed attention to you for no reason?

Because as it stands so far... you have not backed up your position, while I have.

GOOD DAY TO YOU.

Subs with your top secret antenna any proof?, BACK THAT UP

Originally posted by BrieBird
reply to post by wmd_2008

 

A vacuum is a void so by pushing the ionishere up it would create a void and thus that void would be filled by a rushing of air. Seems plausable to me.

The layers rest one on top of the other NO VOID is created if localized heating could be applied cooler parts of the ionosphere would fill the gap THAT's just as plausible and more likely!!!

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Cauliflower

 

Its not like charging the ionosphere wouldn't increase reflectivity, benefiting all the listening stations

HAARP does not really have enough power to "charge" the ionosphere (I assume you mean increasing ionization) but any effects it does have are above Gakona, Alaska.

Apologies first off for not going through the whole thread before replying. As much as phage ruins my dreams of some conspiracies I have to fully agree what he says here. I can't see how a land based piece of equipment such as HAARP can affect or malnipulated weather the other side of a continent or the other side of the world. Im GoIn to get slated here but I really don't see how something on the ground in Alaska can affect the atmosphere on the eastern side of the US. For this surely whatever waves beam out from HAARP must have to travel up and come back down again else where surely its just not possible. I mean come on you yanks sometimes let your bombs and missiles go astray

Originally posted by DenyObfuscation
reply to post by BrieBird

 

If you don't make extrodinary claims how could you ever find extrodinary proof.

This may sound crazy but one could find proof before making the claim?

Naaah, it'll never work!

(and he didn't say NOT to make extraordianary claims, he said that they also require extraordinary proof. Extraordinary claims are easy, humans have incredible imaginations...)

Originally posted by elysiumfire
Jacob1080David:

Now did I spell that out well enough for the deniers?

I
Seriously, I am not out to cheat you, but your claims are out to cheat me of the truth that I know to be factual. It has been stated over and over again that HAARP cannot generate the power required to cause large natural events, such as earthquakes, hurricanes, etc...it really cannot. This addiction to conspiratorial delusion which truthers obssessively cling to, is as bad and damaging as that of the delusions of the religious fundamentalist. You need to raise yourself out of the dark ages and enter into the light of your own renaissance, and you will see that the shadows on the wall are truly...just shadows. In other words, stop being a troglodyte.

Very elaborate and intellectual way of spiting on a...troglodyte.
I agree that the approach and the phrase structure of Jacob isn't his strong point in this thread, it makes him an easy target.

Ok, the thing is, I don't know the truth...hell I know nothing about what HAARP can really do, because it's vague, I haven't seen proof from my very eyes even from a similar yet smaller technology and I rarely believe anything 100% unless I've seen it with my own eyes.

Down to cold hard facts...You, me and everyone here doesn't know shhh

I agree on the idea that HAARP cannot generate the power required to cause large natural events but this could easily be a play on the word "cause".
What about amplify? What about triggering?
What about just filling the glass with the last drop it needs in order to drip?

I'm just trying to be open minded here and a couple of pseudo-science ideas that people "make up" from their own "unofficially approved by the government" claims do often make sense from my pseudo-scientific knowledge. I'm no expert, but you aren't an expert too.

So, if you think taking one side with no solid proof is being "out of the dark ages", well you're still a sheep to me.
I understand your point of view but your "facts" that you rely have not been proven to be the truth yet.

Originally posted by theMediator



Down to cold hard facts...You, me and everyone here doesn't know shhh
...
...

I understand your point of view but your "facts" that you rely have not been proven to be the truth yet.

I disagree. there are obviously people here who actually have an understanding of the fundamentals of physics and meteorology, even if they are not experts they at least have some real experience with real scientific discipline and approach.
And then there are people who, just... don't.
Some things can be known and studied, and have been for years and generations, building up a huge data base of knowedge. Anyone with a functioning brain is free to dip in to that pool and learn themselves. (not saying I have to any degree)
Poster jacob (can't remember full name) obviously has some potential for some real knowledge, but his application of ideas needs work, and he really needs to study the history of chemtrail hoaxing, which could lead to a painful but necessary enlightenment.
The initial criticism was valid.

Originally posted by Phage[/url]
1% of the power necessary to feed a hurricane for a day.

Even if it was 1%, shouldn't they try to DECREASE the severity of the storms if they would care about Americans??

What if maybe, that's what they are doing or trying to accomplish, and failing...would the general public know?
If I had to power to minimize storms by 1%, you bet I would try it.

I know that in this crazy upside down world, some would be willing to enhance by 1% and actually more money will be put in destruction than preservation, just like everything else.
It's clearly a common trend of death and destruction on every level of society for the sake of profit and power...it feels like we ended up on the bad side of the parallel worlds heh

reply to post by ErtaiNaGia


They currently fly the WC-130J, for the last five or six years.