How will we know if it's natural weather or weaponized weather warfare?

reply to post by network dude

It wasn't all that close to NYC, it just skirted Bermuda, then went out to sea.

Exactly, so now anything and everything in that video becomes questionable.

And the only one that came close was in June named Allison.

Somebody said it - Hurricane Erin.

HAARP does not directly do anything to the jet stream. HAARP is an ionospheric heater. The location of the ionosphere affects the location of the jet stream. Bernard Eastlund, father of HAARP, said that ionospheric heating could lift the ionosphere and so alter the course of the jet stream.

To those who said there was no hurricane...whaaat??!!

That's a wrap.

luxordelphi
Somebody said it - Hurricane Erin.

HAARP does not directly do anything to the jet stream. HAARP is an ionospheric heater. The location of the ionosphere affects the location of the jet stream. Bernard Eastlund, father of HAARP, said that ionospheric heating could lift the ionosphere and so alter the course of the jet stream.

To those who said there was no hurricane...whaaat??!!

That's a wrap.

HAARP can't touch the jetstream, in Eastlunds own words:

The Air Force insists that HAARP's electromagnetic emissions will cause "no bio-effects." Eastlund concurs. "Some of the things that are talked about, as a scientist I'm not sure there's any foundation to them -- like mind control and things like that." What about weather modification? "I had looked at using this intense beam, which can be angled, to do some experiments in terms of guiding the jetstream, moving it from one spot to another," Eastlund admitted. "I presume it is possible, which might lend credence to these other things."

Eastlund was less sure that rearranging the ionosphere could cause a calamity. "You can certainly do things that will change the ionosphere," he said from his Texas home. "Then it becomes the burden of proof to see if it has deleterious effects on the ground. And some people speculate that it does. But (the ionosphere) is a pretty low energy density environment."

"What is up there now is not in my opinion big enough to be concerned about," Eastlund said. "It has to be used judiciously but it's not the kind of power level that can do the stuff that's in my patents yet. But they're getting up there. This is a very powerful device. Especially if they go to the expanded stage."

HAARP simply does not have enough power to create a large enough effect in the near vacuum on the edge of space to touch anything at the tropopause. You've been deceived.

THAT is a wrap

reply to post by luxordelphi

To those who said there was no hurricane...whaaat??!!

Nobody said there wasn't a hurricane, but to say there was a hurricane near NY on Sept, 11,2001 that could have been steered by HAARP is a total lie and that was shown.

So let's get the facts straight.

have you seen that? its more like pro-apocalyptic there! stjoelighthouse.com...

The sea and light house are like statues, reminds me movies and video games!

mrthumpy

luxordelphi
So that would be a possible place to look for a HAARP connection i.e. where was the jet stream?

At least 200000ft too low for HAARP to possibly have any effect on it.

Since when do frequencies have a height limit? Since when do artificially created ionospheres have a height limit?

Since it was wind shear that weakened the hurricane, perhaps you'd like to toss out a cause for this so that we all could consider something other than HAARP.

mrthumpy

luxordelphi
Somebody said it - Hurricane Erin.

HAARP does not directly do anything to the jet stream. HAARP is an ionospheric heater. The location of the ionosphere affects the location of the jet stream. Bernard Eastlund, father of HAARP, said that ionospheric heating could lift the ionosphere and so alter the course of the jet stream.

To those who said there was no hurricane...whaaat??!!

That's a wrap.

HAARP can't touch the jetstream, in Eastlunds own words:

The Air Force insists that HAARP's electromagnetic emissions will cause "no bio-effects." Eastlund concurs. "Some of the things that are talked about, as a scientist I'm not sure there's any foundation to them -- like mind control and things like that." What about weather modification? "I had looked at using this intense beam, which can be angled, to do some experiments in terms of guiding the jetstream, moving it from one spot to another," Eastlund admitted. "I presume it is possible, which might lend credence to these other things."

Eastlund was less sure that rearranging the ionosphere could cause a calamity. "You can certainly do things that will change the ionosphere," he said from his Texas home. "Then it becomes the burden of proof to see if it has deleterious effects on the ground. And some people speculate that it does. But (the ionosphere) is a pretty low energy density environment."

"What is up there now is not in my opinion big enough to be concerned about," Eastlund said. "It has to be used judiciously but it's not the kind of power level that can do the stuff that's in my patents yet. But they're getting up there. This is a very powerful device. Especially if they go to the expanded stage."

HAARP simply does not have enough power to create a large enough effect in the near vacuum on the edge of space to touch anything at the tropopause. You've been deceived.

THAT is a wrap

edit on 8-1-2014 by mrthumpy because: (no reason given)

Why do you say this:

HAARP can't touch the jetstream, in Eastlunds own words:

And then quote this:

"I had looked at using this intense beam, which can be angled, to do some experiments in terms of guiding the jetstream, moving it from one spot to another," Eastlund admitted. "I presume it is possible, which might lend credence to these other things."

reply to post by tsurfer2000h

Nobody said there wasn't a hurricane,

You said there wasn't a hurricane:

It doesn't matter where the jet stream was at because there was no hurricane that came close to NY on Sept. 11, 2001 and I provided a map of all hurricanes for that year in my earlier post.

reply to post by luxordelphi


Some might be able to tell, but they would be discredited, ignored or silenced. We have this world view mem going on telling everyone that we have have global climate change. Whether we do or we don't, the idea is being forced on us and you know what they say about big lies, repeat it enough and people will believe it. It does work, look what they did with mandela. That being said, if there is a climate crisis, why wouldn't the PTB use that to their advantage or if there isn't a climate crisis they could produce one and no one would be the wiser? If everyone is expecting rapidly changing unpredictable weather, if you give it to them, no surprise there, just a lot of hardship.

BTW, rapidly changing weather accelerates mutations in our flu viri, what a perfect excuse to drop a pandemic in place and claim it is because of the environmental damage caused by unpredictable weather created by climate change.

Cheers - Dave

luxordelphi
reply to post by tsurfer2000h

 

Nobody said there wasn't a hurricane,

You said there wasn't a hurricane:

It doesn't matter where the jet stream was at because there was no hurricane that came close to NY on Sept. 11, 2001 and I provided a map of all hurricanes for that year in my earlier post.

So he didn't say there wasn't a hurricane - he said there wasn't a hurricane THAT CAME CLOSE TO NY.

What's the problem?

luxordelphi

mrthumpy

luxordelphi
So that would be a possible place to look for a HAARP connection i.e. where was the jet stream?

At least 200000ft too low for HAARP to possibly have any effect on it.

Since when do frequencies have a height limit? Since when do artificially created ionospheres have a height limit?

Since they can only act on the portion of the ionosphere with the appropriate electron density for those frequencies

reply to post by luxordelphi


Because it's not possible with what has actually been built.

bobs_uruncle
reply to post by luxordelphi

 

Some might be able to tell

Yes, those who are obsessed with watching the weather - and computer forecast models - day after day after year after year.

But you're right, they are ignored

reply to post by luxordelphi

You said there wasn't a hurricane:

Way to try and use what I said out of context.

You know what's really funny, is the fact you quoted exactly what I said.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

So he didn't say there wasn't a hurricane - he said there wasn't a hurricane THAT CAME CLOSE TO NY.

What's the problem?

Can't admit being wrong is my guess, but hey what do I know.

reply to post by zatara


Zatara: was finally able to watch the Dr. Judy Wood directed energy weapon video on 9/11 that you put up. Absolutely awesome and totally worth the 2.5 hours all the way down to the last few minutes where she answers some questions. Thank you for that. Half-way or so through the video I wound up with people watching over my shoulder and sitting down with me to view - riveting.

reply to post by luxordelphi


I also watched Judy Woods presentation, and felt justified in my early thinking that it was something other than planes and then thermite that had turned those monsterous buildings to dust.

Scalar weaponry?

I dropped by a few 9-11 threads here and would see the pile on of members that brought up the theory of direct energy weapons. It was vicious.

Pretty soon we may be seeing forums for Chemtrails and Weaponry, Chemtrails and Survival, Chemtrails and Monsanto.

reply to post by Witness2008

Pretty soon we may be seeing forums for Chemtrails and Weaponry, Chemtrails and Survival, Chemtrails and Monsanto.

Those have been discussed in numerous threads concerning chemtrails.

So, I really hope we don't see that.

reply to post by tsurfer2000h


Well....chemtrails do have multiple purposes. With so much information being dug up and leaked out, I wouldn't be surprised to see such things in a couple of years.

reply to post by Witness2008


Can you provide or link to any actual information that has been "dug up" or "leaked out"??

Ta