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.

 

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

page: 9
15
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 13 2014 @ 03:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


Hurricane Erin was the most intensely studied hurricane ever to that point in history. CAMEX-4 didn't go back to 1997. It went back, per your link, to August 15, 2001. Barry wasn't a CAMEX-4 OP prior to Erin. And I mentioned their dry run on Chantal on August 20. The August 19 OP wasn't CAMEX-4.




posted on Feb, 13 2014 @ 04:37 AM
link   
reply to post by luxordelphi
 





Hurricane Erin was the most intensely studied hurricane ever to that point in history.


So your saying they didn't study any other hurricane that came near or even made landfall as much as one that stayed out to sea and wasn't a threat to the US?

Here this should take care of your Erin was turned away from NY nonsense...

onebornfrees911researchreview.blogspot.com...

Time to face the truth...Both you and the good Dr. Wood are wrong and that has been proven.



posted on Feb, 13 2014 @ 06:34 AM
link   
reply to post by luxordelphi
 


It is one of the more historically accurate war movies, though hardly faultless as it's still a movie. If your into this sort of entertainment, as I am, it is very very good indeed, using real aircraft rather than cartoon effects, but of course personal tastes vary massively. x



posted on Feb, 13 2014 @ 07:16 AM
link   
reply to post by waynos
 


Full of disgusting chemtrails though



posted on Feb, 13 2014 @ 02:18 PM
link   

luxordelphi
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


Hurricane Erin was the most intensely studied hurricane ever to that point in history.


any actual evidence to support that??

there were 3 flights into Erin - but in 1998 it looks like [www.aoml.noaa.gov...]Bonnie had at least 15 flights[/url]...which would appear to make it at least 500% more studied than Erin and that was 3 years earlier.......



CAMEX-4 didn't go back to 1997. It went back, per your link, to August 15, 2001.


And here is the page on CAMEX 4 , which was :


The Convection And Moisture EXperiment (CAMEX) is a series of field research investigations sponsored by the Earth Science Enterprise of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). The fourth field campaign in the CAMEX series (CAMEX-4) was held in 16 August - 24 September, 2001 and was based out of Jacksonville Naval Air Station, Florida.


And so what? Are you suggesting that only studies that were part of one of the CAMEX series exist? does a flight not being part of CAMEX 4 make it irrelevant somehow??


Here are the pages for:
Camex3 (1998)
CAMEX 2 (1995)
The first CAMEX (1993)

do you think that flights outside the CAMEX series are not actually doing anything??



Barry wasn't a CAMEX-4 OP prior to Erin. And I mentioned their dry run on Chantal on August 20. The August 19 OP wasn't CAMEX-4.


And so what?
edit on 13-2-2014 by Aloysius the Gaul because: get dates right



posted on Feb, 13 2014 @ 03:39 PM
link   
reply to post by tsurfer2000h
 



So your saying they didn't study any other hurricane that came near or even made landfall as much as one that stayed out to sea and wasn't a threat to the US?


No. I'm saying that 2001 Hurricane Erin was the most intensely studied hurricane to that point in history. Further I'm saying that CAMEX-4 was an experiment; not a study group.

NOAA Hurricane Research


2001 CAMEX-4, a NASA experiment run in conjunction with NOAA's Hurricane Field Program collects detailed data sets on Hurricanes Erin, Gabrielle, and Humberto and Tropical Storm Chantal.


It was during the experiment that Erin lost power.

Warm Core Structure of Hurricane Erin Diagnosed from High Altitude Dropsondes during CAMEX-4


A combination of multiaircraft and several satellite sensors were used to examine the core of Hurricane Erin on 10 September 2001, as part of the Fourth Convection and Moisture Experiment (CAMEX-4) program. During the first set of aircraft passes, around 1700 UTC, Erin was still at its maximum intensity with a central pressure of 969 hPa and wind speed of 105 kt (54 m s−1).



The storm had weakened by 13 m s−1 between the first and second eye penetrations.



Dropwindsonde capability was installed on two National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) aircraft, the upper one flying at 20 km. Here we present results from mature Hurricane Erin (2001), the first hurricane for which these deep profiles were obtained. To glimpse the immense pioneering research that led to the present knowledge on mesoscale processes, the reader is referred to Simpson (2002).


I'm not sure what the enthusiastic blogger in the link you put up is pointing out. I'm thinking it has something to do with the hurricane altering course although the blogger seems more vested in somehow discrediting Dr. Judy Wood than in the facts which are from the same study above that the hurricane altered course. (Truly not a surprise once it had weakened.)


Rapid deepening of Erin ensued on 8 and 9 September with a peak maximum sustained wind of 105 kt (54 m s−1) briefly attained by 1800 UTC 9 September. Thereafter Erin maintained this intensity level until 1200 UTC 10 September, at which point the maximum wind speed began to weaken. As the CAMEX-4 mission was flown into Erin, the storm weakened 25 kt (13 m s−1) while moving toward the northwest at approximately 8–10 kt (4–5 m s−1). On 11 September, a more gradual weakening commenced and the storm recurved sharply toward the east.





Here this should take care of your Erin was turned away from NY nonsense...



Please explain to me in simple terms what the Eureka! moment is here if you feel I have not responded to your objection.



posted on Feb, 13 2014 @ 03:47 PM
link   

luxordelphi

No. I'm saying that 2001 Hurricane Erin was the most intensely studied hurricane to that point in history.


Well yes, Superbowl 2001 was the most intensely studied superbowl to that point in history.

And then came the next one



posted on Feb, 13 2014 @ 03:55 PM
link   

luxordelphi
reply to post by tsurfer2000h
 



So your saying they didn't study any other hurricane that came near or even made landfall as much as one that stayed out to sea and wasn't a threat to the US?


No. I'm saying that 2001 Hurricane Erin was the most intensely studied hurricane to that point in history. Further I'm saying that CAMEX-4 was an experiment; not a study group.

NOAA Hurricane Research


2001 CAMEX-4, a NASA experiment run in conjunction with NOAA's Hurricane Field Program collects detailed data sets on Hurricanes Erin, Gabrielle, and Humberto and Tropical Storm Chantal.


It was during the experiment that Erin lost power.



And so what?

The nature of the CAMEX-4 experiment is clearly posted in my previous message - it was information gathering.

Are you suggesting that CAMEX-4 actually steered or weakened the hurricane?



posted on Feb, 13 2014 @ 04:42 PM
link   
reply to post by luxordelphi
 





It was during the experiment that Erin lost power.


Not exactly...


Rapid deepening of Erin ensued on 8 and 9 September with a peak maximum sustained wind of 105 kt (54 m s−1) briefly attained by 1800 UTC 9 September. Thereafter Erin maintained this intensity level until 1200 UTC 10 September, at which point the maximum wind speed began to weaken. As the CAMEX-4 mission was flown into Erin, the storm weakened 25 kt (13 m s−1) while moving toward the northwest at approximately 8–10 kt (4–5 m s−1). On 11 September, a more gradual weakening commenced and the storm recurved sharply toward the east.



Our analysis of the Atlantic three-day composite sea surface temperature (SST) derived from the Tropical Rainfall Measurement Mission (TRMM) Microwave Radiometer (TMI) shows that Erin moved into sharply cooler waters late on 9 September. Located initially over 30°C water at 0000 UTC 9 September, by 1800 UTC the storm was overlying 27°C temperatures. This was the most obvious cause of Erin’s sudden weakening.


journals.ametsoc.org...



posted on Feb, 13 2014 @ 04:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 





Are you suggesting that CAMEX-4 actually steered or weakened the hurricane?



Now you have gone and given him/her a new idea for their next thread.



posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 01:36 AM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


Re your CAMEX posts:

Yes...CAMEX has been on since 1998, however, it was CAMEX-4 that dropped the dropwinsondes.

Definition of Dropwinsonde


WEATHER&METEOROLOGY
An instrument similar to a rawinsonde except that it is dropped with a parachute from an aircraft to take measurements of the atmosphere's vertical profile as it falls. It is typically used over the oceans during hurricane reconnaissance when the surface launch of a rawinsonde would otherwise be impractical and dangerous. The tracking of the transmitter by 3 or more ground- based stations allows the wind velocity and direction to be calculated.


We're talking about play by play/eye of the hurricane view capability.

Warm Core Structure of Hurricane Erin Diagnosed from High Altitude Dropsondes during CAMEX-4


Here we present results from mature Hurricane Erin (2001), the first hurricane for which these deep profiles were obtained.


So "insignificant" 2001 Hurricane Erin was chosen for this on Sept. 10, 2001. Seems like everybody knew this hurricane was going to be a dud because, for the most part, it wasn't even given honorable mention by the news media.




Are you suggesting that CAMEX-4 actually steered or weakened the hurricane?



Not exactly...not CAMEX-4...but the ER-2 (the one with 70,000 ft. fully loaded capability).

Did you ever see the movie where there's a kid who is accused of a brutal murder (locked room had to be him kind of scenario) and he offers up the defense that "I lose time." meaning he is subject to some kind of fits that he doesn't remember? The ER-2 is a case in point. They seem to have lost time between departure and eye arrival.

NASA Dryden Fact Sheet - ER-2 - High-Altitude Airborne Science Aircraft


The ER-2 operates at altitudes from 20,000 feet to 70,000 feet, which is above 99 percent of the Earth's atmosphere. Depending on aircraft weight, the ER-2 reaches an initial cruise altitude of 65,000 feet within 20 minutes. Typical cruise speed is 410 knots. The range for a normal eight-hour mission is 3,000 nautical miles yielding seven hours of data collection at altitude.



posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 01:48 AM
link   
reply to post by luxordelphi
 


The ER-2 goes to 70,00 feet? Gosh - I'd never have realised......if it weren't for the fact that it is a version of the U-2 that NASA has been operating since 1981!


Why didn't you just say you have no point?


Why do you gish-gallop public information as if it was meaningful?



posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 06:26 PM
link   
reply to post by luxordelphi
 


Adding to the general perception that Erin was nothing of particular interest to New Yorkers in Sept 2001:


Several hundred miles out in the Atlantic, Hurricane Erin—the first Atlantic hurricane of the 2001 season—was weakening as it began to turn toward the north-northeast, away from the East Coast. Though it posed no threat to land, Erin had been producing large swells along local beaches and was one of the main headlines early that morning. In fact, The New York Times weather report on September 11 included a special “Focus” write-up on what it called “Hurricane Day,” explaining how in “9 out of 10 years since 1886, at least one tropical storm or hurricane has raged in the Atlantic on Sept. 11.”


source - emphasis is mine.



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 06:57 AM
link   

Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by luxordelphi
 


The ER-2 goes to 70,00 feet? Gosh - I'd never have realised......if it weren't for the fact that it is a version of the U-2 that NASA has been operating since 1981!


Why didn't you just say you have no point?


Why do you gish-gallop public information as if it was meaningful?






You seem condescending and ridiculing hey?

It’s very obvious you maybe all over the net. No normal human can do what you appear do for interest only. Something about you is fishy to me and you don’t add up.
I’ve read your post and you seem to be knowledgeable about military operations that are weather focussed and experimental. Some on human, plants, water, soil, food (Only God Knows how many times this has happened and is going to happen).
You think HAARP a weather modification weapon, Interesting?
Would you say Geo engineering using harmful substances in small isolated areas around the planet could be under military operation with military planes and military contracted planes doing the work of aerial substance release in conjunction with HAARPs, navy, air force?
These three alone can do some damage with all their contractors combined.



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 07:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 



Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by steaming
 


Yep - you've clearly been drinking the (doctored) cool aid too long!




This is what I'm saying, not real nice at all,


Hope you accept defeat graciously



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 07:28 AM
link   

sunnynights
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 



Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by steaming
 


Yep - you've clearly been drinking the (doctored) cool aid too long!




This is what I'm saying, not real nice at all,


Hope you accept defeat graciously
After awhile, you get used to the usual suspects, saying the same ole blah-blah-blah. Just ignore them.



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 08:52 AM
link   

WonderBoi

sunnynights
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 



Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by steaming
 


Yep - you've clearly been drinking the (doctored) cool aid too long!




This is what I'm saying, not real nice at all,


Hope you accept defeat graciously
After awhile, you get used to the usual suspects, saying the same ole blah-blah-blah. Just ignore them.


Posting the same scientific facts that have yet to be disputed.



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 03:34 PM
link   

sunnynights
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 



Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by steaming
 


Yep - you've clearly been drinking the (doctored) cool aid too long!




This is what I'm saying, not real nice at all,


Hope you accept defeat graciously


I have no idea what you think you have beaten me at. Perhaps you would like to be a little less obtuse??

edit on 17-2-2014 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 03:43 PM
link   
reply to post by WonderBoi
 





After awhile, you get used to the usual suspects, saying the same ole blah-blah-blah. Just ignore them.


If you would quit posting the same old supposed evidence then you wouldn't get the same ol blah, blah, blah.



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 04:04 PM
link   
reply to post by tsurfer2000h
 


Or even use the search function to see if your "new" evidence has been posted before........you could save yourself a fair bit of embarrassment and remove the need for quite so much cognitive dissonance

edit on 17-2-2014 by Aloysius the Gaul because: spelling



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join