Australian Burea Of Meteorology satellite image of HAARP activity ??

reply to post by Bedlam


I always saw a LOT of strange areal phenomenon out there...

2nd

Bedlam
You're looking at the wrong link, Mr Thumpy - this one is the one that's under "radar image/national radar loop", which is sort of a giveaway, and has another giveaway where it shows you you've selected both radar and satellite image to be superimposed.

www.bom.gov.au...

Think we're getting our wires crossed here (probably causing interference :cheers I was referring to the image that was originally posted by Puzzuzu
tinypic.com...

from this page

www.bom.gov.au...

Which doesn't seem to tie in with the glitch explanation given by Pauligirl

mrthumpy

Think we're getting our wires crossed here (probably causing interference :cheers

I was referring to the image that was originally posted by Puzzuzu

Ah! Ok. I thought the thread was about that set of radar pics with return glitch donuts in.

THAT is a satellite imaging error. I look at that and immediately see that the satellite is using some sort of spin imaging technique. In that case, when something screws up, you often see spiral patterns superimposed on the photo/scan. We had a thread on that some months ago. Let me see if the site you link to has enough data on the particular sat that took the image.

eta: this image is a composite of two things, the underlying IR false color image, that's the one that shows Australia in sort of orange and green, and an overlay of a feed from NASA called "Blue Marble" which is a cloud cover image. That's the one where the error seems to have occurred. The IR part doesn't seem to be screwy at first glance.

etaa: And yes, the 'Blue Marble' system is a false color radiometric spin imager.

Here is a long but detailed explanation of why this happens from the last spiral HAARP death ray thread.

reply to post by Bedlam


That clears that up.

reply to post by mrthumpy


Thanks for all of the responses, guys! I got a lot more information than I thought I would have

Found some more circles - a blast from the past.

Nearly 200 images of Ancient Spirals from all over the world.

Did these ancients also start seeing these on their weather graphics?

And wanted to leave a message for us that it was not good?

reply to post by luxordelphi


They probably saw them in sea shells and coiled ferns

reply to post by Bedlam


Ah well I was going to try to connect to circle modulated heating and magnetic field lines and the near New Zealand conjugate point for HAARP which then would have progressed to the plasma bullseye and the Iridium satellites and the current glowy plasma spheres BUT the images were too fuzzy and that was annoying.

AlphaHawk
reply to post by luxordelphi

 

So HAARP has an array which is 33 acres in size.

How do you suppose something of that size would be able to be "mobile"?

It's not me who supposed that - it was the HAARP guy - Papadopoulos.

I'm guessing he's heard of miniaturization.

Also DARPA has been creating artificial ionospheres using HAARP. They're lower than the real one. As of November of last year they had gotten them to last an hour or more. This fall (now) they were supposed to go back to HAARP and increase that time. So not only will the heater be mobile, but the stuff that gets heated will too.

luxordelphi
reply to post by Bedlam

 

Ah well I was going to try to connect to circle modulated heating and magnetic field lines and the near New Zealand conjugate point for HAARP which then would have progressed to the plasma bullseye and the Iridium satellites and the current glowy plasma spheres BUT the images were too fuzzy and that was annoying.

As there seems to be a sort of annoying dual assumption thread going, were you trying to connect circle modulated heating with the spiral-y looking cloud banding or the donuts around the radars?

BTW, the field strength at the one-hop conjugate point is so low it requires fairly aggressive reception techniques, and that's only a ducted conjugate for ELF or VLF. ELF isn't going to make nice donuts (1) because it's too damned big, and it won't ionize air because the energy is so low, and there's jack-all for signal strength anyway. You can't make nice tight ionospheric plasma with ELF. Iridium satellites seem to be a sort of non-sequitur here, though.

Also, a scanning technique for the array's output doesn't seem to have diddly to do with seeing donuts in Austrailan radar, since it can't possibly be aimed there from Alaska. Even with the conjugate point, you're not teleporting the array output to the antipodes, you have to use the array to generate a signal in the polar electrojet that's propagated down the magnetic conjugate line. The array is barely able to make nice plasma balls right over the array, much less could it do so from that distance, even if the field line could somehow magically duct the beam intact a few thousand miles.

It looks like a sort of graphic keyword search fail to me, yes, there is a picture of something toroidal associated with the array, but again, did you READ it? It can't possibly relate.

luxordelphi

AlphaHawk
reply to post by luxordelphi

 

So HAARP has an array which is 33 acres in size.

How do you suppose something of that size would be able to be "mobile"?

It's not me who supposed that - it was the HAARP guy - Papadopoulos.

I'm guessing he's heard of miniaturization.

Also DARPA has been creating artificial ionospheres using HAARP. They're lower than the real one. As of November of last year they had gotten them to last an hour or more. This fall (now) they were supposed to go back to HAARP and increase that time. So not only will the heater be mobile, but the stuff that gets heated will too.

Dennis? You have a link to a paper where he says you can "miniaturize it"? Because, really, you can't. Not only is it really TOUGH to generate, distribute, and radiate 3.6MW in a nice portable handheld sort of thing, there's a basic sort of physics that says the antennae in the array have to be a certain size for the frequencies you're using. And you can't just go up on the frequency arbitrarily to get the size down, because over about 50MHz it starts just punching through instead of heating. And you have to space the array elements out a certain amount or they don't make phased arrays anymore. And if you space them out TOO much it becomes a sparse array and you end up with ambiguous lobes all over the place. Not to mention the more raggedy and non-uniform you distribute them the crappier the beam, even if you solve for the rather painful set of equations to form a beam with a non-uniform array.

If, on the other hand, you're talking about that article in Wired where he's talking about underground mapping, you only need to cause a rhythmic disturbance in the magnetic field. You can do that by waiting for sunup or sunset in most cases, a thunderstorm on the horizon will also do the trick, and there are a number of ways you can cause it artificially. Note that you have no access to the electrojet in Iran, so he had to be talking about something else.

There is also a lot of confusion in the CT set between HAARP and every other radio source, thus do you get HAARP radar, or shipborne HAARP deathbeams which are nothing more than radar setups. And Papadopoulos wrote some papers involving a "mobile ELF source" which is not describing a truck with a dish on, but is a geometric modulation technique with the array that moves the point in the ionosphere that's generating the ELF waves.

You're right about being able to make ionized patches at lower altitudes (although it's still VERY high), there's a research facility on the East coast that's doing a lot of work in intentional ionospheric ducting on a fieldable level. Something you could drive around in an 18 wheeler.

reply to post by Bedlam

As there seems to be a sort of annoying dual assumption thread going, were you trying to connect circle modulated heating with the spiral-y looking cloud banding or the donuts around the radars?

Well, I had read your explanation for the radar glitch BUT the HAARPsters seem to be into this bullseye thing as well and I just thought that maybe there was another way to get this representational image. There is SO much specialized equipment out there and down here now that there is very little that can't be "seen" and it just makes sense that there would be interference at times.

The first outdoor camera security system I ever set up wound up giving me a view of the interior of a bus going by on the street and a view of someone else's living room. That's simplistic, I know, but that was the thought.

This conjugate point off New Zealand was mapped in concentric circles, like a bullseye. And then the heater itself is used in this circle modulation as one of its' modes. (The original design for the facility was more rectangular or square and one of their modes is more like that too but this circle thing seems to be favored.) Anyway, I had read the paper about setting up this buoy and why and how but the actual mission statement was mystifying.

ELF/VLF Measurements on Autonomous Buoys in the Southern Pacific Ocean

More generally, the purpose of the proposed experiments is to ‘learn’ to amplify injected ELF/VLF signals so as to better utilize them in the scattering of trapped radiation belt particles.

The Iridium satellites (the 66) were going to communicate with this buoy after deployment and retrieve signals. (The iridium venture was apparently, in part, bailed out by the government and so they owed something and that's how they were brought on board.)

(I think this is the point where I explain the HAARP conjugate point.)

Buoy Feasibility Study

The VLF Group at Stanford University desires to place a receiver at the magnetic conjugate point of the HAARP transmitter. The transmitter generates strong radio waves in Alaska, some of which will propagate along the magnetic field lines of the earth, and fall upon the point 56.19± S, 173.80± E.

So here are some more circles - polar - the magnetic field lines and the Iridium Satellite orbits. (Some of the weather images I had seen showed arcs because the rest of the circle was off the page.) (Magnetic field lines too need a picture.)

Geomagnetic Field

This was in like 2007 or so, this buoy stuff.

Then HAARP went on to create a bullseye. (Agitation of the ionosphere creates ELF, yes, but it also creates or starts alot of other stuff.) And before I forget, you can view pictures of the buoy on both links here and they sure seem kind of small to me to pick up ELF. (And also, how would you know what a magnetic field line can transmit when these experiments are supposedly learning about it?) Anyway, the bullseye was created by creating a patch of artificial ionosphere. (See answer to your next post to talk about mobility.)

reply to post by luxordelphi


I think I can re-state it a bit more understandably than that paper. The iridium part was just a sat comm link back to the head shed with the buoy data, it's a satphone module with a digital data feed from the buoy's computer. I've got to go get Thanksgiving stuff at the local store, we're having a potluck back at work. Will try to re-summarize the buoy thing when I get back.

You didn't say, but from this reply I assume you're talking about radar donuts? The other thing with the spirals was a glitch in Blue Marble.

reply to post by Bedlam

Dennis? You have a link to a paper where he says you can "miniaturize it"? Because, really, you can't.

No...I don't have a link to a study but I do have the quote from his interview.

Strange New Air Force Facility Energizes Ionosphere, Fans Conspiracy Flames

Papadopoulos, for example, says he wants to do another round of subterranean surveillance experiments. "Personally, I believe it can reach 1,000 kilometers. It can't reach Iran, if that's your question," he laughs. "But if I put Haarp on a ship, or on an oil platform, who knows?" Not that he has concrete plans for such tests in Alaska, let alone in the Persian Gulf—though he does mention a facility in Puerto Rico as a possibility.

That interview is from 2009 (the same year of the bullseye story) and I would hope that we've all gotten on.

I'm thinking two things here after reading your explanation of why HAARP can't be miniaturized. (Well, actually, three things.)

1. Popadopoulos outranks you.
2. Everything technological (and I mean everything) was big once.
3. For all the people that think something can't be done, there's always someone who'll do it.

Note that you have no access to the electrojet in Iran, so he had to be talking about something else.

I hope the wink was to let me know that what you just said was nonsense because, Slim, Papa said he'd put HAARP on a ship.

And Papadopoulos wrote some papers involving a "mobile ELF source" which is not describing a truck with a dish on, but is a geometric modulation technique with the array that moves the point in the ionosphere that's generating the ELF waves.

Now we're getting somewhere.

But the thread was about the circles/spirals/arcs appearing on weather imaging.

Here's the bullseye story:

Artificial ionosphere creates bullseye in the sky

And here are the incredibly poor and fuzzy images of the recent (November of last year) plasma spheres the HAARP ionospheric heating created.

Artificial Ionospheric Plasma Clouds Created Using HAARP

Those images, after seeing the Norway spiral, are just disgusting. Who all do they think they're kidding?

Happy turkey day and back to you.

luxordelphi

Papadopoulos, for example, says he wants to do another round of subterranean surveillance experiments. "Personally, I believe it can reach 1,000 kilometers. It can't reach Iran, if that's your question," he laughs. "But if I put Haarp on a ship, or on an oil platform, who knows?" Not that he has concrete plans for such tests in Alaska, let alone in the Persian Gulf—though he does mention a facility in Puerto Rico as a possibility.

That's the sole quote all you guys are going by, and extrapolating towards infinity. He hasn't done it, though.

That interview is from 2009 (the same year of the bullseye story) and I would hope that we've all gotten on.

You're back to linking shapes as having meaning but not looking at why the shapes and why they're not related.

It's like looking for keywords but not reading the text.

I'm thinking two things here after reading your explanation of why HAARP can't be miniaturized. (Well, actually, three things.)

1. Popadopoulos outranks you.
2. Everything technological (and I mean everything) was big once.
3. For all the people that think something can't be done, there's always someone who'll do it.

Perhaps he outranks phased array math, and can manage a lambda/50 spacing and still get a beam. Or he can drop a 10kW output amp in his pocketses, or make a 10MHz dipole the size of an umbrella despite it being a heinously inefficient mismatch.

There are other means to get the minimal geomagnetic disturbance you need to do magnetotelluric imaging, which is what they're talking about. You might be able to take a really big craft like an aircraft carrier and put a small linear array on it. But nothing like HAARP per se.

I hope the wink was to let me know that what you just said was nonsense because, Slim, Papa said he'd put HAARP on a ship.

No, it was more to let you know you didn't even know what magnetotelluric scans or phased arrays were until I mentioned them. But yeah, you know more about it than I do. Perhaps you can tell me what HAARP's role is in such a thing from your vast wealth of background knowledge against which you are judging nonsense vs sense. I'll wait.

Now we're getting somewhere.

But the thread was about the circles/spirals/arcs appearing on weather imaging.

Yet, you keep moving the goal posts. Back to that then, are you speaking of the Blue Marble screwup, or the weather radar donuts? They're totally different things.

Here's the bullseye story:

And here are the incredibly poor and fuzzy images of the recent (November of last year) plasma spheres the HAARP ionospheric heating created.

Those images, after seeing the Norway spiral, are just disgusting. Who all do they think they're kidding?

Happy turkey day and back to you.

If you see a blue car and a blue sky, do they seem co-identical, or somehow mystically entwined to you? You seem fixated on shapes that have similarities, but are caused by different things and have no connection in any way.

Seriously, though, if all you're going to do is tell me I'm wrong because what I tell you, although backed up by whatever proof you'd like (if you can understand the math) doesn't match the CT meme du jour, it's not worth the effort to prechew the buoy papers for you.

If you're interested in the project and what it did, that's one thing, but if all you're looking for is some sort of validation that it's got something to do with sacred geometry or the like it's not worth the time.

eta: if you're that worried about what Dennis meant, why not ask him? He'll get back to you. Ask something like this - Did you mean that you could miniaturize a large 2D array like HAARP's IRI and of similar output and put it on a ship, or did you mean a much smaller lower powered linear array? How did you intend to access the equatorial electrojet from Iran? And see what you get back for an answer. I doubt he's even aware of the oddball memes the quote spawned.

reply to post by Bedlam


Dear basher: just one word for you: carom.

And, by the by, I went to the JPL open houses when they had them because I had kids who were interested. I got in on the ground floor of underground imaging which back then was already spectacular - sans HAARP.

But, seriously, care to explain the buoy mission statement?

Further, care to explain the appalling fuzzy spheres in comparison to the Norway spiral?

All ears, as they say...


edit to add: you've still got another day for turkey shopping unless you all are not from around here?

luxordelphi
reply to post by Bedlam

 

Dear basher: just one word for you: carom.

Not bashing at all, just not interested in spending time summarizing if you don't care.

And, by the by, I went to the JPL open houses when they had them because I had kids who were interested. I got in on the ground floor of underground imaging which back then was already spectacular - sans HAARP.

Good! I do radar and radio design work for a living. And have done contract work for BAE Advanced, oddly enough.

But, seriously, care to explain the buoy mission statement?

Further, care to explain the appalling fuzzy spheres in comparison to the Norway spiral?

All ears, as they say...

Okey dokey, I actually enjoy that sort of thing if you're actually interested. Only I don't think the answer's going to be as connected or sensational as you want. Even though the shapes are the same, or similar.

edit to add: you've still got another day for turkey shopping unless you all are not from around here?

Got to have time to cook it. I'm also running at half speed due to some damned virus going around the base, which is why I'm not on tonight.

reply to post by Bedlam


Now that we've entered calmer waters...sorry you are under the weather. Put the bird in the sink to defrost over night (if it was frozen) and then a 5am kitchen duty call on the day of should put it all on the table by 2pm. (Best to
get someone in to help who has done this all before.)

Looking forward to your answers when you are feeling up to it. It's always annoying, I know, to have people like Eastlund and now Papa talking out of school. I'm sure you'll make the best of it. And I never meant to accuse you of being a sitaround.

In terms of the very first post, where the link shows a spiral imaging error from Blue Marble, there is a previous thread with a large detailed explanation about that sort of thing.

That thread's first post is here and my explanation of it starts here.

Spiral bands like that in a satellite imager generally tells you it's a spin imager with some sort of issue, and that's what's going on here. The IR false color image is from a Japanese imaging satellite that uses a rectilinear scanner, and that part's ok, but the cloud cover part is superimposed from NASA's Blue Marble which uses a spin imaging radiometer to make cloud images.

You see spiral bands in a spin imaging satellite, it tells you something's up with the satellite. In the example I linked above, it's probably aliasing error caused by a hurricane blowing in faster than the scan image is taken.

In the Australia shot, it looks like there's a problem with the chopper reference. You notice the sawtooth noise pattern in the spiral? Starts off ok and ramps up to a whiteout? That's a common sort of error when you've got some sort of reference problem in a spin imager. You can also get an error that looks like that if the bird flies into daylight and you get a temperature ramp on the imager during the shot.