-
As of today ICMag has his own Discord server. In this Discord server you can chat, talk with eachother, listen to music, share stories and pictures...and much more. Join now and let's grow together! Join ICMag Discord here! More details in this thread here: here.
HAARP Engineering 'FRANKENSTORM' Hurricane Sandy - CAUGHT on SATELLITE and RADAR!!!
- Thread starter PoopyTeaBags
- Start date
with a 30% accuracy. so are we gonna believe the government?
that's what you want me to believe.
and i would like you to believe, not in the possibility but in the probability and likelihood of nefarious control by corporate/government collusion.
i'll consider your view as soon as they declassify the Kennedy Assassination files.
unspoken
Member
Who else should they get to build a sophisticated radar/communications system? Gerber?
unspoken
Member
What does that even mean? They make models. Do you understand what a confidence interval or margin of error is?
The european models consistently outperform and embarass the american models, probably why we are spending 300M to upgrade our systems. My local us weather guy gives his prediction and the european prediction because he knows theirs is better.
U.S. Air Force
U.S. Marine Corps
U.S. Coast Guard
Navy Reserve
Defense.gov
Joint Chiefs of Staff
Careers
.Contact Us.
New Energy Center to Impact Future Weapons for Naval and Joint Forces
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Story Number: NNS090917-07Release Date: 9/17/2009 7:44:00 AM
A A A
By John J. Joyce, Naval Surface Warfare Center Dahlgren Public Affairs
DAHLGREN, Va. (NNS) -- The Navy demonstrated its commitment to "game-changing" directed energy technological programs at the Naval Directed Energy Center (NDEC) ribbon cutting ceremony held at Naval Surface Warfare Center Dahlgren Division (NSWCDD) Sept. 10.
The focus of activity in the new building will be directed energy systems and applications, which use electromagnetic energy to project military force and augment conventional capabilities.
"This ribbon-cutting celebrates NAVSEA'S (Naval Sea Systems Command) investment in the Navy's future," said NSWC Dahlgren Division Commander Capt. Sheila Patterson. "This new Naval Directed Energy Center will double the space available for developing our directed energy programs and provide laboratories, computing spaces and offices to help us get the latest technology to our warfighters as soon as possible and protect them from harm's way."
Military officials foresee NDEC as the Navy's center of excellence for directed energy where complex systems engineering and integration problems can be solved and cutting edge solutions made a reality for U.S. troops.
Directed energy systems offer unique alternatives to traditional kinetic weapons such as guns and bombs because a myriad of targets can be engaged with more precision and variable effects.
"Directed Energy Weapons are a critical game-changing technology for the Navy-Marine Corps Team," said James Thomsen, Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development and Acquisition. "It's a technology that we need to understand better. We need to develop it and use it wisely."
"The standing up of the Naval Directed Energy Center is a perfect example of how Dahlgren is leading the way in developing and fielding directed energy warfare solutions, technologies and systems for our Sailors and Marines," said Susan Hudson, NSWC Dahlgren Electromagnetic and Sensor Systems Department Head.
"Our team of government employees, academia and contractors are harnessing various directed energy disciplines in order to develop systems that will enhance what's available to warfighters in order to achieve mission success in the changing operational environment."
The facility is the first in a series of planned construction projects designed to accommodate increasing directed energy activity at Dahlgren.
Moreover, NSWCDD technologists have been making a difference in directed energy research and development throughout the decades. Their understanding � and discoveries � led to the methodologies behind the electromagnetic launch of projectiles using stored electrical energy. These methodologies are critical to the evolution of the Railgun Program.
"Our scientists well understand that the introduction of directed energy weapons into 21st century naval forces has the potential to change naval tactics as fundamentally as computers have changed the way we work and communicate," said Patterson.
As the global security environment becomes increasingly complex and challenging for U.S. defense, NSWC Dahlgren's Directed Energy Warfare Office (DEWO) provides alternative and wide ranging deterrent options for U.S. Naval Forces and Combatant Commanders. DEWO options range from high energy lasers and high power microwaves to directed energy initiatives that counter improvised explosive devices.
For more news from Naval Surface Warfare Center Dahlgren, please visit www.navy.mil/local/nswcdahlgren.
U.S. Marine Corps
U.S. Coast Guard
Navy Reserve
Defense.gov
Joint Chiefs of Staff
Careers
.Contact Us.
New Energy Center to Impact Future Weapons for Naval and Joint Forces
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Story Number: NNS090917-07Release Date: 9/17/2009 7:44:00 AM
A A A
By John J. Joyce, Naval Surface Warfare Center Dahlgren Public Affairs
DAHLGREN, Va. (NNS) -- The Navy demonstrated its commitment to "game-changing" directed energy technological programs at the Naval Directed Energy Center (NDEC) ribbon cutting ceremony held at Naval Surface Warfare Center Dahlgren Division (NSWCDD) Sept. 10.
The focus of activity in the new building will be directed energy systems and applications, which use electromagnetic energy to project military force and augment conventional capabilities.
"This ribbon-cutting celebrates NAVSEA'S (Naval Sea Systems Command) investment in the Navy's future," said NSWC Dahlgren Division Commander Capt. Sheila Patterson. "This new Naval Directed Energy Center will double the space available for developing our directed energy programs and provide laboratories, computing spaces and offices to help us get the latest technology to our warfighters as soon as possible and protect them from harm's way."
Military officials foresee NDEC as the Navy's center of excellence for directed energy where complex systems engineering and integration problems can be solved and cutting edge solutions made a reality for U.S. troops.
Directed energy systems offer unique alternatives to traditional kinetic weapons such as guns and bombs because a myriad of targets can be engaged with more precision and variable effects.
"Directed Energy Weapons are a critical game-changing technology for the Navy-Marine Corps Team," said James Thomsen, Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development and Acquisition. "It's a technology that we need to understand better. We need to develop it and use it wisely."
"The standing up of the Naval Directed Energy Center is a perfect example of how Dahlgren is leading the way in developing and fielding directed energy warfare solutions, technologies and systems for our Sailors and Marines," said Susan Hudson, NSWC Dahlgren Electromagnetic and Sensor Systems Department Head.
"Our team of government employees, academia and contractors are harnessing various directed energy disciplines in order to develop systems that will enhance what's available to warfighters in order to achieve mission success in the changing operational environment."
The facility is the first in a series of planned construction projects designed to accommodate increasing directed energy activity at Dahlgren.
Moreover, NSWCDD technologists have been making a difference in directed energy research and development throughout the decades. Their understanding � and discoveries � led to the methodologies behind the electromagnetic launch of projectiles using stored electrical energy. These methodologies are critical to the evolution of the Railgun Program.
"Our scientists well understand that the introduction of directed energy weapons into 21st century naval forces has the potential to change naval tactics as fundamentally as computers have changed the way we work and communicate," said Patterson.
As the global security environment becomes increasingly complex and challenging for U.S. defense, NSWC Dahlgren's Directed Energy Warfare Office (DEWO) provides alternative and wide ranging deterrent options for U.S. Naval Forces and Combatant Commanders. DEWO options range from high energy lasers and high power microwaves to directed energy initiatives that counter improvised explosive devices.
For more news from Naval Surface Warfare Center Dahlgren, please visit www.navy.mil/local/nswcdahlgren.
unspoken
Member
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XKXYYD805ws
It's a shame that our military would attempt to utilize technology.
It's a shame that our military would attempt to utilize technology.
...and space weather directly influences local weather and climate.
HAARP can produce high pressure or low pressure by exciting the ionosphere thereby 'steering' or 'directing' storms.
that is the research...for weaponizing weather.
done by defense contractor(war machine) raytheon (and others).
btw, i don't pay credence to Alex Jones for one reason...the one you assume makes him lunatic .fringe
unspoken
Member
The effect on Earth of solar storms can be grouped into three categories:
- Radio blackouts - occur shortly after solar storm
- Radiation - occur within hours of solar storm
- Geomagnetic storms - occur one to four days after solar storm
not hurricanes, earthquakes, or low pressure systems in the troposphere.
Other effects of geomagnetic storms are temporary degradation of high-frequency radio communication and satellite navigation. Commercial aircraft that fly over the poles often have to change routes during strong solar storms to avoid communication or navigation problems.
Satellites in Earth's orbit can also be affected by geomagnetic storms. Sensitive electronics on satellites can be damaged by solar radiation and geomagnetic storms. With much of our daily lives dependent on satellite communication, interruptions to everyday conveniences can occur with the most intense storms.
This is what haarp is concerned with. communications research. not overpowering the sun.
- Radio blackouts - occur shortly after solar storm
- Radiation - occur within hours of solar storm
- Geomagnetic storms - occur one to four days after solar storm
not hurricanes, earthquakes, or low pressure systems in the troposphere.
Other effects of geomagnetic storms are temporary degradation of high-frequency radio communication and satellite navigation. Commercial aircraft that fly over the poles often have to change routes during strong solar storms to avoid communication or navigation problems.
Satellites in Earth's orbit can also be affected by geomagnetic storms. Sensitive electronics on satellites can be damaged by solar radiation and geomagnetic storms. With much of our daily lives dependent on satellite communication, interruptions to everyday conveniences can occur with the most intense storms.
This is what haarp is concerned with. communications research. not overpowering the sun.
unspoken
Member
Good to know.
herbalistRoots
Active member
seems pertinent
Conspiracy Theory With - Jesse Ventura HAARP [Full Length • HD]
http://youtu.be/iDfwHU7Cw6g
Jesse Ventura and his team head to Alaska to investigate the purpose of the HAARP installation.
In a remote region of Alaska, a special government research center is said to be testing the High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program, which, some believe, allows radio waves to be developed as a potential weapon. If true, these radio waves could be used to change the weather and control people's minds. Jesse and his team head to the Last Frontier to investigate, but nervous security guards try to stop them at the gate of the facility and keep them from finding the real purpose first-hand. The team also talks to a scientist who demonstrates how radio waves can be used to literally move clouds.
Featured Experts and Eyewitnesses include: Dr. Brooks Agnew, a physicist who believes he accidentally triggered an earthquake by using radio waves to locate underground oil; Dr. Roger Smith, director of the Geophysical Institute at the University of Alaska at Fairbanks, which coordinates research at the HAARP facility in Gakona, AK; Dr. Nick Begich, a native Alaskan and anti-HAARP activist; and Robert Eastlund, the son of Bernard Eastlund, whose ideas were allegedly the catalyst for the creation of HAARP.
Conspiracy Theory With - Jesse Ventura HAARP [Full Length • HD]
http://youtu.be/iDfwHU7Cw6g
Jesse Ventura and his team head to Alaska to investigate the purpose of the HAARP installation.
In a remote region of Alaska, a special government research center is said to be testing the High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program, which, some believe, allows radio waves to be developed as a potential weapon. If true, these radio waves could be used to change the weather and control people's minds. Jesse and his team head to the Last Frontier to investigate, but nervous security guards try to stop them at the gate of the facility and keep them from finding the real purpose first-hand. The team also talks to a scientist who demonstrates how radio waves can be used to literally move clouds.
Featured Experts and Eyewitnesses include: Dr. Brooks Agnew, a physicist who believes he accidentally triggered an earthquake by using radio waves to locate underground oil; Dr. Roger Smith, director of the Geophysical Institute at the University of Alaska at Fairbanks, which coordinates research at the HAARP facility in Gakona, AK; Dr. Nick Begich, a native Alaskan and anti-HAARP activist; and Robert Eastlund, the son of Bernard Eastlund, whose ideas were allegedly the catalyst for the creation of HAARP.
Weather Warfare:
The Invisible U.S. Military Offensives in Weather Weaponry
by
keith harmon snow
July, 2002
To gain further insight into the mental illness of our leaders, and the
irresponsible, catastrophic direction in which they have thrust us, consider
the ongoing research, development and applications of weather warfare
technologies. Adherents of weather warfare prefer to call it ³environmental
modification techniques² * or ENMOD. The corporate media has reported almost
nothing about these aerospace and defense programs, or the technologies
involved. Thus do I open the discussion of the ENMOD arena by deconstructing
recent news stories.
First note that the Internet abounds with conspiracy theories of all stripes
about weather warfare, environmental modification and climatic mayhem.
Numerous postings declare the climate instabilities we are already seeing to
be the work of the antichrist or the New World Order * indeed in some cases
they are one and the same -- and some of these web sites describe people
legitimately concerned and vocal about climatic change as the agents of a
³left-wing conspiracy² with a ³communist agenda² ever hostile to ³free
enterprise.²
Buried beneath the volumes of imaginative but wholly fictitious conspiracies
that gain wide circulation however, are the many legitimate secret programs
orchestrated behind the darkness and denial of the military-industrial
complex. Call these conspiracies if you like. This story * weather as a
weapon * is certainly not one of them and, depending on how you look at it,
this is certainly one of them.
The Fog Watch (Propaganda):[1]
Throughout April, 2002, Amherst College (MA) radio (WAMH) ran a series of
public service announcements (PSAs) sponsored by a Christian church
organization declaring the existence of weather modification technologies,
and advocating that listeners contact the U.S. government to demand that
these technologies be deployed to moderate the extreme weather and drought
we are seeing. According to these PSAs, the government use of these existing
technologies to mitigate hostile weather is a fundamental right of every
U.S. citizen.[2]
On February 17, 2002, ABC News ran a very brief ³news² clip titled ³Weather
As A Weapon?² The inquisitive title infers that this is some not-yet-certain
possibility, contributing to the delusional beliefs that weather warfare
might be something we * the public * ought to at least be thinking about,
and possibly debating. ABC would never have run the story without some
greater purpose than simply ³to keep the public informed² -- the expected
role of the democratic free press that ABC purports to be part of.[3]
The article describes the advantages of weather modification: seeding
clouds, creating rain or tornadoes over hostiles forces, burning through fog
to expose enemy aircraft:
Consider what might happen on some battlefield of the future where the U.S.
military could gain a tactical advantage by changing the weather. There are
several ways they might try to do that. One way would be to create rain that
turns battlefields into mud baths in order to immobilize enemy troops and
enemies. Another is by triggering lightning storms over airfields to keep
hostile aircraft on the ground. Yet another possibility would be to burn
through a heavy fog by firing lasers to give U.S. fighter pilots a better
view of enemy targets. An Air Force research paper called ³Owning the
Weather in 2025² predicts that weather modification could reshape
battlefields. [4]
Weather warfare, of course, is set in some amorphous future battlespace.
There is ABC¹s first deception. ABC draws attention to the Air Force
document Owning the Weather in 2025. This is an unclassified document,
accessible to the public, and it suggests that ENMOD research and
development is all mere theory and speculation.
Owning the Weather in 2025 appears on its face to reveal significant details
about the nature of U.S. national security and defense capabilities.
However, in the age of international terrorism, with the U.S. military and
its multinational corporations and their media minions whipping up a frenzy
about terrorists of all stripes, anthrax scares and world trade massacres --
and with rapid information access and exchange making such reports available
to hoards of uncivilized information-seeking barbarians feared by the
Pentagon -- we can be sure that this document shows us only what we are
intended to see.
Owning the Weather in 2025 serves the greater purpose of exposing only what
is efficacious to the military, to the intelligence apparatus, to the
companies they are in league with, and to the compromised policymakers
seeking public support * by any means -- for the military programs they are
paid to peddle. That is ABC¹s second deception: steering interested readers
toward an inversion of reality, a public relations document, officially
sanctioned, released and posted by the military. ABC does not question the
origins of this document, or why it has suddenly come into vogue.
ABC confirms that weather warfare is, at the very least, under development:
the article closes noting that substantial ongoing investments in research
and development have continued.
In the U.S. and in many other countries, the private sector continues to
work on weather modification technology ‹ work that could also be used on
the battlefield. And as this research continues on, for example, cloud
seeding techniques that produce heavy rain to help farmers in time of
drought or laser technology that could clear heavy fog for passenger jets,
the military is watching.[5]
To say that the military is ³watching² is to lie outright. There is ABC¹s
third deception: as I will imminently show, the military has funded and
sponsored these weather warfare technologies for over fifty years. ABC¹s
fourth deception is the suggestion that the private sector and the
government defense sector are independent, that one does not wash the hand,
or wipe the ass, of the other. Nothing could be further from the truth.
The fifth deception by ABC News is the suggestion that these life and earth
destroying technologies * pursued with a scientific hubris that is psychotic
and obscene -- will also serve peaceful uses. Indeed, given the industrial
acceleration of climatic mayhem we can be sure that the public will be
clamoring for these weather modification technologies. The further
suggestion is that their military adaptability is an afterthought, rather
than their raison d¹etre. That is ABC¹s sixth deception.
Naturally, weather modification tools will revive gardens of sunflowers and
fields of wheat stricken by drought, and they will guide passenger jets full
of innocent people (!) to safety. By implication, these weather modification
technologies are essential to human survival, they will never be used
unjustly, they are as benign as atoms for peace. Such arguments about the
ENMOD arena will increasingly proliferate with great media fanfare, serving
the intended purpose of manipulating the public mind, as information about
ENMOD technologies is slowly and strategically transitioned out of the
(classified) closet.
Indeed, the public has paid hundreds of millions of dollars, at least -- and
it is most likely billions -- to develop these technologies * a fact that
ABC does not share -- so we might as well see them put to good use. Hiding
the proliferation of public subsidies for weather warfare is ABC¹s seventh
deception.
The main purpose of the ABC article * and the WAMH public service
announcement * is to introduce a new subject heretofore forbidden by the
military and, its extension, the corporate media. These articles signal the
beginnings of a propaganda campaign to habituate citizens to a happy,
un-dissenting coexistence with weather warfare technology. That is ABC¹s
eighth deception.
The deeper purpose of the ABC ³news² clip * the ninth deception -- is to
garner support from U.S. citizens to withdraw from * to denounce, evade or
trample on * an international treaty prohibiting environmental warfare,
signed by the U.S. in the 1970¹s.
Thus does the bold and colorful subtitle, and the paragraph that follows,
elucidate the central theme of the ABC article: ³AGREEMENT BARS WEATHER
MANIPULATION.²
But there is a problem turning theory into fact. Using weather as a weapon
is a clear violation of international agreements. In 1977, the United
Nations passed, and the U.S. signed, a resolution that prohibits changing
the weather for hostile purposes on the grounds that too many civilians
could be harmed. So the U.S. military, which once seeded clouds in Vietnam
to produce heavy rains along the Ho Chi Minh trail, can now only concentrate
on better weather forecasting. ³We want to anticipate and exploit the
weather, not modify it,² says U.S. Air Force Director of Weather Brig. Gen.
Fred Lewis.
There is no problem turning fact into propaganda: some ENMOD technologies
have been tested and, as reported elsewhere, used in battle already. It has
been reported for example that weather warfare technologies cleared the
skies to enable NATO carpet-bombing of Serbia * causing unprecedented,
widespread, long-lasting droughts.[6] So there is ABC¹s tenth deception. In
contradistinction to the suggestions by ABC News, we are not talking about
merely seeding a few clouds. Here are the eleventh, twelfth and thirteenth
deceptions: ABC News hides the scale, magnitude and lethal capabilities of
ENMOD weaponry.
The United States is party to an arms control treaty known as the
³Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Other Hostile Use of
Environmental Modification Techniques² (ENMOD Treaty), ratified in 1980.[7]
We do not know why the U.S. signed this treaty in 1977, but we can be at
least 95 % certain that the Nixon/Ford administrations did not do so out of
concern that ³too many civilians could be harmed.² There is ABC¹s fourteenth
deception.
In the wake of the 1970s¹ U.S. Senate Select Intelligence Committee hearings
on covert actions, the broad spectrum of political assassinations, coups,
secret operations and technology developments deemed essential to the
national security apparatus were driven underground in highly classified
programs.[8] Just as the assassinations, coups and covert operations never
stopped, the programs to develop weather warfare continued. Undoubtedly, the
U.S. signed the 1977 ENMOD Treaty for cosmetic purposes only.
ABC quotes Air Force Director of Weather Brig. Gen. Fred Lewis, and choosing
this person as the sole authority allowed to speak on the U.S. military¹s
weather warfare capabilities is ABC¹s fifteenth deception. Brigadier
Generals are credible enough, and he utters some truth, and ABC does not
question this truth.
³We want to anticipate and exploit the weather, not modify it,² says U.S.
Air Force Director of Weather Brig. Gen. Fred Lewis.
It is a curious statement, in the context it is in, because it is defensive
at its core. It is a direct lie. Significant evidence suggests that
somewhere in the national security apparatus * DOD, DOE, NSA, CIA, DIA, FBI,
or deeper * there are ongoing, intensive programs in ENMOD technology.
Indeed, the highly invisible U.S. National Reconnaissance Office * which
feeds the National Security Agency and the Central Intelligence Agency --
might be the culprit: the NRO plans, builds and operates America¹s spy
satellites, and they specialize in intelligence-gathering and information
warfare.
As I will show, the entire subject of weather warfare revolves around
³plausible deniability² and the capacity of elite decision makers to
³plausibly deny² that such technologies exist (just as assassinations were
not committed, coups not fomented, massacres not perpetrated). Because proof
of secret operations is highly classified, hence invisible, the unverifiable
accusations are answered with plausible denials.
The statement by Brig. General Fred Lewis is contradicted, in its most
simple form, by the obvious fact that all branches of the U.S. military and
security apparatus rely on sophisticated SIGINT (signal intelligence),
COMINT (communications intelligence), C4I (command, control, communication,
computing and intelligence) and EW (electronic warfare) technologies whose
entire mission and purpose can be, and often has been, compromised,
neutralized or entirely defeated by weather conditions in the battlespace
environment.[9]
The statement is further contradicted by the obvious military thrusts to
develop capabilities that maximize stealth and, simultaneously, minimize
risk to U.S. troops, and the propensity, again well documented, to use
clandestine operations premised, again, on ³plausible denial.² In light of
these major policy and field objectives, the existence of an entire spectrum
or portfolio of ENMOD technologies is both plausible and certain. Said
differently, it is irrational, and unlikely, and naïve, and unreasonable to
suppose the absence of these technologies.
Owning the Weather in 2025, advertised by ABC News, confirms the offensive
interests the U.S. Air Force has in ³owning and controlling² the weather
through warfare. (Projected ENMOD capabilities are delineated in Table 1.)
Numerous citations and references reveal that military analysts and
scientists have been working on weather modification issues in some
capacities.
http://www.buergerwelle.de/assets/f..._military_offensives_in_weather_weaponry.html
The Invisible U.S. Military Offensives in Weather Weaponry
by
keith harmon snow
July, 2002
To gain further insight into the mental illness of our leaders, and the
irresponsible, catastrophic direction in which they have thrust us, consider
the ongoing research, development and applications of weather warfare
technologies. Adherents of weather warfare prefer to call it ³environmental
modification techniques² * or ENMOD. The corporate media has reported almost
nothing about these aerospace and defense programs, or the technologies
involved. Thus do I open the discussion of the ENMOD arena by deconstructing
recent news stories.
First note that the Internet abounds with conspiracy theories of all stripes
about weather warfare, environmental modification and climatic mayhem.
Numerous postings declare the climate instabilities we are already seeing to
be the work of the antichrist or the New World Order * indeed in some cases
they are one and the same -- and some of these web sites describe people
legitimately concerned and vocal about climatic change as the agents of a
³left-wing conspiracy² with a ³communist agenda² ever hostile to ³free
enterprise.²
Buried beneath the volumes of imaginative but wholly fictitious conspiracies
that gain wide circulation however, are the many legitimate secret programs
orchestrated behind the darkness and denial of the military-industrial
complex. Call these conspiracies if you like. This story * weather as a
weapon * is certainly not one of them and, depending on how you look at it,
this is certainly one of them.
The Fog Watch (Propaganda):[1]
Throughout April, 2002, Amherst College (MA) radio (WAMH) ran a series of
public service announcements (PSAs) sponsored by a Christian church
organization declaring the existence of weather modification technologies,
and advocating that listeners contact the U.S. government to demand that
these technologies be deployed to moderate the extreme weather and drought
we are seeing. According to these PSAs, the government use of these existing
technologies to mitigate hostile weather is a fundamental right of every
U.S. citizen.[2]
On February 17, 2002, ABC News ran a very brief ³news² clip titled ³Weather
As A Weapon?² The inquisitive title infers that this is some not-yet-certain
possibility, contributing to the delusional beliefs that weather warfare
might be something we * the public * ought to at least be thinking about,
and possibly debating. ABC would never have run the story without some
greater purpose than simply ³to keep the public informed² -- the expected
role of the democratic free press that ABC purports to be part of.[3]
The article describes the advantages of weather modification: seeding
clouds, creating rain or tornadoes over hostiles forces, burning through fog
to expose enemy aircraft:
Consider what might happen on some battlefield of the future where the U.S.
military could gain a tactical advantage by changing the weather. There are
several ways they might try to do that. One way would be to create rain that
turns battlefields into mud baths in order to immobilize enemy troops and
enemies. Another is by triggering lightning storms over airfields to keep
hostile aircraft on the ground. Yet another possibility would be to burn
through a heavy fog by firing lasers to give U.S. fighter pilots a better
view of enemy targets. An Air Force research paper called ³Owning the
Weather in 2025² predicts that weather modification could reshape
battlefields. [4]
Weather warfare, of course, is set in some amorphous future battlespace.
There is ABC¹s first deception. ABC draws attention to the Air Force
document Owning the Weather in 2025. This is an unclassified document,
accessible to the public, and it suggests that ENMOD research and
development is all mere theory and speculation.
Owning the Weather in 2025 appears on its face to reveal significant details
about the nature of U.S. national security and defense capabilities.
However, in the age of international terrorism, with the U.S. military and
its multinational corporations and their media minions whipping up a frenzy
about terrorists of all stripes, anthrax scares and world trade massacres --
and with rapid information access and exchange making such reports available
to hoards of uncivilized information-seeking barbarians feared by the
Pentagon -- we can be sure that this document shows us only what we are
intended to see.
Owning the Weather in 2025 serves the greater purpose of exposing only what
is efficacious to the military, to the intelligence apparatus, to the
companies they are in league with, and to the compromised policymakers
seeking public support * by any means -- for the military programs they are
paid to peddle. That is ABC¹s second deception: steering interested readers
toward an inversion of reality, a public relations document, officially
sanctioned, released and posted by the military. ABC does not question the
origins of this document, or why it has suddenly come into vogue.
ABC confirms that weather warfare is, at the very least, under development:
the article closes noting that substantial ongoing investments in research
and development have continued.
In the U.S. and in many other countries, the private sector continues to
work on weather modification technology ‹ work that could also be used on
the battlefield. And as this research continues on, for example, cloud
seeding techniques that produce heavy rain to help farmers in time of
drought or laser technology that could clear heavy fog for passenger jets,
the military is watching.[5]
To say that the military is ³watching² is to lie outright. There is ABC¹s
third deception: as I will imminently show, the military has funded and
sponsored these weather warfare technologies for over fifty years. ABC¹s
fourth deception is the suggestion that the private sector and the
government defense sector are independent, that one does not wash the hand,
or wipe the ass, of the other. Nothing could be further from the truth.
The fifth deception by ABC News is the suggestion that these life and earth
destroying technologies * pursued with a scientific hubris that is psychotic
and obscene -- will also serve peaceful uses. Indeed, given the industrial
acceleration of climatic mayhem we can be sure that the public will be
clamoring for these weather modification technologies. The further
suggestion is that their military adaptability is an afterthought, rather
than their raison d¹etre. That is ABC¹s sixth deception.
Naturally, weather modification tools will revive gardens of sunflowers and
fields of wheat stricken by drought, and they will guide passenger jets full
of innocent people (!) to safety. By implication, these weather modification
technologies are essential to human survival, they will never be used
unjustly, they are as benign as atoms for peace. Such arguments about the
ENMOD arena will increasingly proliferate with great media fanfare, serving
the intended purpose of manipulating the public mind, as information about
ENMOD technologies is slowly and strategically transitioned out of the
(classified) closet.
Indeed, the public has paid hundreds of millions of dollars, at least -- and
it is most likely billions -- to develop these technologies * a fact that
ABC does not share -- so we might as well see them put to good use. Hiding
the proliferation of public subsidies for weather warfare is ABC¹s seventh
deception.
The main purpose of the ABC article * and the WAMH public service
announcement * is to introduce a new subject heretofore forbidden by the
military and, its extension, the corporate media. These articles signal the
beginnings of a propaganda campaign to habituate citizens to a happy,
un-dissenting coexistence with weather warfare technology. That is ABC¹s
eighth deception.
The deeper purpose of the ABC ³news² clip * the ninth deception -- is to
garner support from U.S. citizens to withdraw from * to denounce, evade or
trample on * an international treaty prohibiting environmental warfare,
signed by the U.S. in the 1970¹s.
Thus does the bold and colorful subtitle, and the paragraph that follows,
elucidate the central theme of the ABC article: ³AGREEMENT BARS WEATHER
MANIPULATION.²
But there is a problem turning theory into fact. Using weather as a weapon
is a clear violation of international agreements. In 1977, the United
Nations passed, and the U.S. signed, a resolution that prohibits changing
the weather for hostile purposes on the grounds that too many civilians
could be harmed. So the U.S. military, which once seeded clouds in Vietnam
to produce heavy rains along the Ho Chi Minh trail, can now only concentrate
on better weather forecasting. ³We want to anticipate and exploit the
weather, not modify it,² says U.S. Air Force Director of Weather Brig. Gen.
Fred Lewis.
There is no problem turning fact into propaganda: some ENMOD technologies
have been tested and, as reported elsewhere, used in battle already. It has
been reported for example that weather warfare technologies cleared the
skies to enable NATO carpet-bombing of Serbia * causing unprecedented,
widespread, long-lasting droughts.[6] So there is ABC¹s tenth deception. In
contradistinction to the suggestions by ABC News, we are not talking about
merely seeding a few clouds. Here are the eleventh, twelfth and thirteenth
deceptions: ABC News hides the scale, magnitude and lethal capabilities of
ENMOD weaponry.
The United States is party to an arms control treaty known as the
³Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Other Hostile Use of
Environmental Modification Techniques² (ENMOD Treaty), ratified in 1980.[7]
We do not know why the U.S. signed this treaty in 1977, but we can be at
least 95 % certain that the Nixon/Ford administrations did not do so out of
concern that ³too many civilians could be harmed.² There is ABC¹s fourteenth
deception.
In the wake of the 1970s¹ U.S. Senate Select Intelligence Committee hearings
on covert actions, the broad spectrum of political assassinations, coups,
secret operations and technology developments deemed essential to the
national security apparatus were driven underground in highly classified
programs.[8] Just as the assassinations, coups and covert operations never
stopped, the programs to develop weather warfare continued. Undoubtedly, the
U.S. signed the 1977 ENMOD Treaty for cosmetic purposes only.
ABC quotes Air Force Director of Weather Brig. Gen. Fred Lewis, and choosing
this person as the sole authority allowed to speak on the U.S. military¹s
weather warfare capabilities is ABC¹s fifteenth deception. Brigadier
Generals are credible enough, and he utters some truth, and ABC does not
question this truth.
³We want to anticipate and exploit the weather, not modify it,² says U.S.
Air Force Director of Weather Brig. Gen. Fred Lewis.
It is a curious statement, in the context it is in, because it is defensive
at its core. It is a direct lie. Significant evidence suggests that
somewhere in the national security apparatus * DOD, DOE, NSA, CIA, DIA, FBI,
or deeper * there are ongoing, intensive programs in ENMOD technology.
Indeed, the highly invisible U.S. National Reconnaissance Office * which
feeds the National Security Agency and the Central Intelligence Agency --
might be the culprit: the NRO plans, builds and operates America¹s spy
satellites, and they specialize in intelligence-gathering and information
warfare.
As I will show, the entire subject of weather warfare revolves around
³plausible deniability² and the capacity of elite decision makers to
³plausibly deny² that such technologies exist (just as assassinations were
not committed, coups not fomented, massacres not perpetrated). Because proof
of secret operations is highly classified, hence invisible, the unverifiable
accusations are answered with plausible denials.
The statement by Brig. General Fred Lewis is contradicted, in its most
simple form, by the obvious fact that all branches of the U.S. military and
security apparatus rely on sophisticated SIGINT (signal intelligence),
COMINT (communications intelligence), C4I (command, control, communication,
computing and intelligence) and EW (electronic warfare) technologies whose
entire mission and purpose can be, and often has been, compromised,
neutralized or entirely defeated by weather conditions in the battlespace
environment.[9]
The statement is further contradicted by the obvious military thrusts to
develop capabilities that maximize stealth and, simultaneously, minimize
risk to U.S. troops, and the propensity, again well documented, to use
clandestine operations premised, again, on ³plausible denial.² In light of
these major policy and field objectives, the existence of an entire spectrum
or portfolio of ENMOD technologies is both plausible and certain. Said
differently, it is irrational, and unlikely, and naïve, and unreasonable to
suppose the absence of these technologies.
Owning the Weather in 2025, advertised by ABC News, confirms the offensive
interests the U.S. Air Force has in ³owning and controlling² the weather
through warfare. (Projected ENMOD capabilities are delineated in Table 1.)
Numerous citations and references reveal that military analysts and
scientists have been working on weather modification issues in some
capacities.
http://www.buergerwelle.de/assets/f..._military_offensives_in_weather_weaponry.html
http://www.infowars.com/articles/science/weather_mod_own_weather_by_2025.htm
Technology advancements in five major areas are necessary for an integrated weather-modification capability: (1) advanced nonlinear modeling techniques, (2) computational capability, (3) information gathering and transmission, (4) a global sensor array, and (5) weather intervention techniques. Some intervention tools exist today and others may be developed and refined in the future.
Table 1 - Operational Capabilities Matrix
DEGRADE ENEMY FORCES ENHANCE FRIENDLY FORCES
Precipitation Enhancement Precipitation Avoidance
- Flood Lines of Communication - Maintain/Improve LOC
- Reduce PGM/Recce Effectiveness - Maintain Visibility
- Decrease Comfort Level/Morale - Maintain Comfort Level/Morale
Storm Enhancement Storm Modification
- Deny Operations - Choose Battlespace Environment
Precipitation Denial Space Weather
- Deny Fresh Water - Improve Communication Reliability
- Induce Drought - Intercept Enemy Transmissions
Space Weather - Revitalize Space Assets
- Disrupt Communications/Radar Fog and Cloud Generation
- Disable/Destroy Space Assets - Increase Concealment
Fog and Cloud Removal Fog and Cloud Removal
- Deny Concealment - Maintain Airfield Operations
- Increase Vulnerability to PGM/Recce - Enhance PGM Effectiveness
Detect Hostile Weather Activities Defend against Enemy Capabilities
Current technologies that will mature over the next 30 years will offer anyone who has the necessary resources the ability to modify weather patterns and their corresponding effects, at least on the local scale. Current demographic, economic, and environmental trends will create global stresses that provide the impetus necessary for many countries or groups to turn this weather-modification ability into a capability.
Technology advancements in five major areas are necessary for an integrated weather-modification capability: (1) advanced nonlinear modeling techniques, (2) computational capability, (3) information gathering and transmission, (4) a global sensor array, and (5) weather intervention techniques. Some intervention tools exist today and others may be developed and refined in the future.
Table 1 - Operational Capabilities Matrix
DEGRADE ENEMY FORCES ENHANCE FRIENDLY FORCES
Precipitation Enhancement Precipitation Avoidance
- Flood Lines of Communication - Maintain/Improve LOC
- Reduce PGM/Recce Effectiveness - Maintain Visibility
- Decrease Comfort Level/Morale - Maintain Comfort Level/Morale
Storm Enhancement Storm Modification
- Deny Operations - Choose Battlespace Environment
Precipitation Denial Space Weather
- Deny Fresh Water - Improve Communication Reliability
- Induce Drought - Intercept Enemy Transmissions
Space Weather - Revitalize Space Assets
- Disrupt Communications/Radar Fog and Cloud Generation
- Disable/Destroy Space Assets - Increase Concealment
Fog and Cloud Removal Fog and Cloud Removal
- Deny Concealment - Maintain Airfield Operations
- Increase Vulnerability to PGM/Recce - Enhance PGM Effectiveness
Detect Hostile Weather Activities Defend against Enemy Capabilities
Current technologies that will mature over the next 30 years will offer anyone who has the necessary resources the ability to modify weather patterns and their corresponding effects, at least on the local scale. Current demographic, economic, and environmental trends will create global stresses that provide the impetus necessary for many countries or groups to turn this weather-modification ability into a capability.
unspoken
Member
What is the document you are quoting from? I know the name of it, but what IS it?
Also, I'm reading the whole paper, and the more I read the more it is apparent how full of bullstuff this is. Have you read it? The whole thing?
"[FONT=VERDANA,ARIAL] On the other hand, the weather-modification applications proposed in this report range from technically proven to potentially feasible. They are similar, however, in that none are currently employed or envisioned for employment by our operational forces."
It talks mostly about small scale attacks, like on drug cartels who have hundreds of their own fighter jets.
[/FONT]
Also, I'm reading the whole paper, and the more I read the more it is apparent how full of bullstuff this is. Have you read it? The whole thing?
"[FONT=VERDANA,ARIAL] On the other hand, the weather-modification applications proposed in this report range from technically proven to potentially feasible. They are similar, however, in that none are currently employed or envisioned for employment by our operational forces."
It talks mostly about small scale attacks, like on drug cartels who have hundreds of their own fighter jets.
[/FONT]
Potential Technologies
Ionospheric modeling will be significantly enhanced with the availability of daily worldwide data. Ionospheric vertical and spatial structure will be more readily apparent which can lead to advances in scientific understanding of coupling mechanisms within the ionosphere, thermosphere, and the magnetosphere. Insertion of daily measurements of the total EUV flux into ionospheric models will also significantly improve model accuracies. (See SPACECAST 2020 White Paper "Space-Based Solar Monitoring and Alert System (U).")
The scientific challenge in understanding ionospheric scintillation is to determine the exact geophysical conditions leading to the onset of plasma depletions at a particular location and time. This challenge relates directly to a major operational FLTSATCOM/AFSATCOM requirement to issue accurate outage forecasts to operational satellite users dispersed worldwide and operating over a wide range of frequencies. The ability to forecast these C3I outages will overcome a long standing limitation of reliable FLTSATCOM/AFSATCOM in the equatorial region.
A potential exploitation technology can be developed in the twenty-first century once ionospheric variability is understood, globally measured and mapped on a daily basis, and made predictable with a high degree of accuracy. This technology will involve temporarily modifying the ionosphere through insertion of gaseous compounds, such as those containing molecular oxygen (O2), atomic oxygen (O), molecular nitrogen (N2), nitrous oxide (NO), helium (He), and atomic hydrogen (H), at certain altitudes and locations to increase the neutral and electron density of a given region through the natural photochemical reactions initiated by the absorption of EUV radiation (figure 3). This effect, however, can also be enhanced by shooting a high energy laser, microwave, or particle beam (wavelength will be dependent on gaseous compounds used) into the chemical insertion region to accelerate the photoionization and dissociative recombination processes. End result from the chemical insertion will be increased electron density having a jamming effect on the enemy's radio wave propagation capability due to absorption of the wave energy by the charged particles in the enhanced ionosphere. The downside is that your own communications can be affected as well.
http://www.fas.org/spp/military/docops/usaf/2020/app-g.htm
Ionospheric modeling will be significantly enhanced with the availability of daily worldwide data. Ionospheric vertical and spatial structure will be more readily apparent which can lead to advances in scientific understanding of coupling mechanisms within the ionosphere, thermosphere, and the magnetosphere. Insertion of daily measurements of the total EUV flux into ionospheric models will also significantly improve model accuracies. (See SPACECAST 2020 White Paper "Space-Based Solar Monitoring and Alert System (U).")
The scientific challenge in understanding ionospheric scintillation is to determine the exact geophysical conditions leading to the onset of plasma depletions at a particular location and time. This challenge relates directly to a major operational FLTSATCOM/AFSATCOM requirement to issue accurate outage forecasts to operational satellite users dispersed worldwide and operating over a wide range of frequencies. The ability to forecast these C3I outages will overcome a long standing limitation of reliable FLTSATCOM/AFSATCOM in the equatorial region.
A potential exploitation technology can be developed in the twenty-first century once ionospheric variability is understood, globally measured and mapped on a daily basis, and made predictable with a high degree of accuracy. This technology will involve temporarily modifying the ionosphere through insertion of gaseous compounds, such as those containing molecular oxygen (O2), atomic oxygen (O), molecular nitrogen (N2), nitrous oxide (NO), helium (He), and atomic hydrogen (H), at certain altitudes and locations to increase the neutral and electron density of a given region through the natural photochemical reactions initiated by the absorption of EUV radiation (figure 3). This effect, however, can also be enhanced by shooting a high energy laser, microwave, or particle beam (wavelength will be dependent on gaseous compounds used) into the chemical insertion region to accelerate the photoionization and dissociative recombination processes. End result from the chemical insertion will be increased electron density having a jamming effect on the enemy's radio wave propagation capability due to absorption of the wave energy by the charged particles in the enhanced ionosphere. The downside is that your own communications can be affected as well.
http://www.fas.org/spp/military/docops/usaf/2020/app-g.htm
unspoken
Member
So you believe they only understand weather well enough to predict it with 30% accuracy, yet they can bend it at their will and steer it wherever they want?
not what i said at all.
inferring they are smart enough to not reveal what they do know.
weather predictions are just best guess extrapolations of their interpretations of what their sensors show...about 30% accurate in reports to publics.
no one is revealing the nature of submarine propulsion, for instance, and likewise no one is revealing capabilities of phased interferiometer broadcasts.
your insistence is taxing. my grandson is getting points...
inferring they are smart enough to not reveal what they do know.
weather predictions are just best guess extrapolations of their interpretations of what their sensors show...about 30% accurate in reports to publics.
no one is revealing the nature of submarine propulsion, for instance, and likewise no one is revealing capabilities of phased interferiometer broadcasts.
your insistence is taxing. my grandson is getting points...
The Digital Ionospheric Sounding System Network
To accomplish the task of specifying the global ionosphere in real time, the Air Force Space Forecast Center operates a network of fully automated digital ionosondes, the Digital Ionospheric Sounding System (DISS). Figure 1 shows the locations of the 13 deployed systems, and of six systems for which sites have been selected and deployment is expected by the end of 1995. The network is connected through a real time data network (Automated Weather Net - AWN, and Atlantic/Pacific Region equivalents ATMED and PACMED) operated by the US Air Force. The locations of the US Air Force Space Forecast Center (AFSFC), in Colorado, and of the hub of the AWN in Oklahoma are marked. Additional ionosondes which do not report in real time fill in the data base for requirements which do not rely on real time data, but which can live with 6 to 24 hours delayed summaries these stations provide.
http://www.ips.gov.au/IPSHosted/INAG/uag-104/text/bullett1.html
a full 25% to 100% fail on realtime reporting...
To accomplish the task of specifying the global ionosphere in real time, the Air Force Space Forecast Center operates a network of fully automated digital ionosondes, the Digital Ionospheric Sounding System (DISS). Figure 1 shows the locations of the 13 deployed systems, and of six systems for which sites have been selected and deployment is expected by the end of 1995. The network is connected through a real time data network (Automated Weather Net - AWN, and Atlantic/Pacific Region equivalents ATMED and PACMED) operated by the US Air Force. The locations of the US Air Force Space Forecast Center (AFSFC), in Colorado, and of the hub of the AWN in Oklahoma are marked. Additional ionosondes which do not report in real time fill in the data base for requirements which do not rely on real time data, but which can live with 6 to 24 hours delayed summaries these stations provide.
http://www.ips.gov.au/IPSHosted/INAG/uag-104/text/bullett1.html
a full 25% to 100% fail on realtime reporting...
