Re: Are nukes the answer to global warming?
From: Uno (uno_at_max.com)
Date: 02/02/05
- Next message: Eric Gisin: "Re: Are nukes the answer to global warming?"
- Previous message: Hatunen: "Re: Are nukes the answer to global warming?"
- In reply to: Ed Earl Ross: "Re: Are nukes the answer to global warming?"
- Next in thread: Ed Earl Ross: "Re: Are nukes the answer to global warming?"
- Reply: Ed Earl Ross: "Re: Are nukes the answer to global warming?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2005 18:18:18 GMT
Do US try to make experiment in weather control for warfare? They are able
to control the jet stream on Earth.
Weather Control
Avalanches of energy dislodged by such radio waves could hit us hard. Their
work suggests that technicians could control global weather by sending
relatively small 'signals' into the Van Allen belts (radiation belts around
Earth). Thus Tesla's resonance effects can control enormous energies by tiny
triggering signals.
The Begich/ Manning book asks whether that knowledge will be used by
war-oriented or biosphere-oriented scientists.
The military has had about twenty years to work on weather warfare methods,
which it euphemistically calls weather modification. For example, rainmaking
technology was taken for a few test rides in Vietnam. The U.S. Department of
Defense sampled lightning and hurricane manipulation studies in Project
Skyfire and Project Stormfury. And they looked at some complicated
technologies that would give big effects. Angels Don't Play This HAARP cites
an expert who says the military studied both lasers and chemicals which they
figured could damage the ozone layer over an enemy. Looking at ways to cause
earthquakes, as well as to detect them, was part of the project named Prime
Argus, decades ago. The money for that came from the Defense Advanced
Research Projects Agency (DARPA, now under the acronym ARPA.) In 1994 the
Air Force revealed its Spacecast 2020 master plan which includes weather
control. Scientists have experimented with weather control since the 1940's,
but Spacecast 2020 noted that "using environmental modification techniques
to destroy, damage or injure another state are prohibited." Having said
that, the Air Force claimed that advances in technology "compels a
reexamination of this sensitive and potentially risky topic."
"Ed Earl Ross" <edearl@satx.rr.com> wrote in message
news:bp8Md.44$sr1.11@fe2.texas.rr.com...
> Uno wrote:
> > US is cooking the Atmosphere.
> > HAARP Boils the Upper Atmosphere
>
>
> The earth receives 6.2781 x 10^20 KW-hours of energy per day from
> the Sun. See: angelfire.com/mt/marksomers/cosmicaccounting.html
>
> The world electricity production for 2003 was 16,600 Tera
> Watt-hours. 16,600 x 10^12 = 1.66 x 10^16
>
> If HAARP used all the electricity in the world, which it does not,
> it would assault the atmosphere with only 1/10,000th the energy of
> the sun.
>
> HAARP is powered by six 2,500 kW (2.5 x 10^6) diesel generators (6
> * 2.5 x 10^6 W = 1.5 x 10^7 W). This means HAARP puts about
> 42/100,000,000,000th the amount of energy as the sun into the
> earth's atmosphere.
>
> The atmospheric effects of HAARP compared to the Sun is tiny,
> similar to a firecracker compared to an atomic bomb.
- Next message: Eric Gisin: "Re: Are nukes the answer to global warming?"
- Previous message: Hatunen: "Re: Are nukes the answer to global warming?"
- In reply to: Ed Earl Ross: "Re: Are nukes the answer to global warming?"
- Next in thread: Ed Earl Ross: "Re: Are nukes the answer to global warming?"
- Reply: Ed Earl Ross: "Re: Are nukes the answer to global warming?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|