Hello all, I wanted to share something with all of you. Many of you who know me. Know I have been researching the law to include US Government documents and the UN's agenda for at least 20 yrs now. Some of you have use my research in your own affairs. Those who know my work as a legal researcher, know I only present “FACT>” So, if I state something it's been researched . With that said I'm going to say something most of you will wonder if I've lost my mind. I'm going to suggest that, or ask. Is it possible some or all of the bad natural events, such as tornadoes, hurricanes, tsunamis, and earthquakes mankind has suffered in the past almost 40 yrs now. Could they, or some of them be intentionally created??? Most would say, “NO WAY”.... I beg to differ that it might be possible!

Here is a link to the UN's Website that list these events and others, along with their uses as possible weapons of war! FACT!!!!!!!!

http://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%201458/volume-1458-A-17119-English_French.pdf

Here is the title 987 United Nations — Treaty Series • Nations Unies — Recueil des Traités 367
No. 17119. CONVENTION ON THE PROHI
BITION OF MILITARY OR ANY OTHER
HOSTILE USE OF ENVIRONMENTAL
MODIFICATION TECHNIQUES. ADOPT
ED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF
THE UNITED NATIONS ON 10 DECEM
BER 1976'

Understanding relating to article II
It is the understanding of the Committee that the following
examples are illustrative of phenomena that could be caused
by the use of environmental modification techniques as de
fined in article II of the Convention: earthquakes; tsunamis;
an upset in the ecological balance of a region; changes in
weather patterns (clouds, precipitation, cyclones of various
types and tornadic storms); changes in climate patterns;
changes in ocean currents; changes in the state of the ozone
layer; and changes in the state of the ionosphere.
It is further understood that all the phenomena listed above,
when produced by military or any other hostile use of envi
ronmental modification techniques, would result, or could
reasonably be expected to result, in widespread, long-lasting
or severe destruction, damage or injury. Thus, military or any
other hostile use of environmental modification techniques
as defined in article II, so as to cause those phenomena as
a means of destruction, damage or injury to another State
Party, would be prohibited.

For them to prohibit this is at the very least a tacit acknowledgement that they believe it's possible.

okcmilitia,

hate to rain on your parade, but, this post does not belong here. This part of the forum is FOR SITREPS ONLY. This belongs in the discussion section.

Why can't people use this part of the forum for real SITREPS?

When the SHTF occurs people will not look to this section for anything viable.

mad coyotee

Like most junk science, it's based partly on fact. Fog dispersal operations were being conducted at English airbases back in WWII, and cloud seeding experiments have been conducted as early as 1903, so weather modification is certainly possible, though on a very limited basis.

This has led to more adventurous experiments, and some wild rumors. There was some thought of steering a hurricane, by selectively seeding a single quadrant of the storm, back in the 1960's. However, it was determined that even if all the assets at the disposal of the United states Air force were used, there would be little or no effect. Water temperature, both on the ocean surface and aloft, is really the guiding force, and seeding would have no noticeable effect on the storm. And even if it did have some effect, it would be impossible to determine what effect the seeding operation had on it. To my knowledge, no actual experimentation was ever conducted.

That hasn't stopped the rumors from flying, though. The President of Guatemala claimed in 1967 that a hurricane that threatened the Texas coastline was moved west to hit Guatemala, with heavy loss of life. Rumors flew even more in 1969 (I believe), when a hurricane unexpectedly split in two, and became two hurricanes. This had never been observed before, and rumors quickly developed that the Air Force was somehow responsible. It wasn't.

There have been other conspiracy theories. One of Michael Crichton's last novels revolved around a rather fantastic plot by environmentalists(!) to induce earthquakes, and environmentalists have even claimed that Hurricane Katrina was somehow induced by the burning of fossil fuels.

So, it really doesn't surprise me that the United Nations, (who, to my knowledge, doesn't employ a single scientist or weather forecaster) would take up this cause. It beats doing real work, which is actually probably a good thing. Keep them involved with meaningless crap like this, and we won't have anything to fear from them.

Finally, Mad Coyotee is right. I'll move this to the UPN forum.

Onward and upward,
airforce

A number of years ago, I heard a claim that there is a technology that can cause earthquakes and weather changes anywhere in the world using focused energy waves. Supposedly, three countries; the US, Russia and China have deployed the technology.

It sounded like something from a Michael Crichton story and probably is; but the weather, along with earthquakes, tsunamis and volcanic eruptions, seem to have gotten weird over the past 25 years.

If you are a conspiracy theorist, the US system is supposedly in Alaska.

I think you're talking about HAARP , which is a favorite target for conspiracy theorists. George Noory and, before him, Art Bell, have been talking about it for years.

Onward and upward,
airforce

Yeah, that was even the subject of a few conspiracy theory based action movies. Steven Segal who figures he is better than us as a patriot and all around human being did a movie called Under Seige II which was roughly based on the scenario of a rogue group getting hold of a HAARP weapon.

High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program HAARP.
In radio broadcasting it has been found that if you place two 500,000 watts transmitters on a frequency and tune the center freq just 1/2 phase off you can achieve a 1 mega watt output. If you place the antennas so that they point to the same place on earth based upon the bounce the signal at the destination is the sum of that signal.
If instead you align the Haarp's 1000 antennas per field on the ionosphere at a specific location with no bounce the multiple signals cause the Ionosphere at this point to become superheated and as it warms it raises. This in simplistic terms is the creation of a low pressure zone. This raising causes clouds to rise and cool. The rising also causes the air to fill the void. This movement into this void dependent upon the direction of the previous winds can cause a spiral wind that may even become a thunderstorm that spawns Tornados.
This is based upon a single frequency.
Now if I know from research that the frequency of the earth, yes it has a frequency, and set the 1000 antennas in Alaska to transmit on an angle that will return to earth at say the fault in Arkansas. I do the same thing at the field in Utah. I set the frequency to be just 1/2 cycle higher than the resonant freq of the Fault on the Utah Transmitters. Then I set the Alaska Transmitters to arrive just 1/2 cycle lower than the fault freq, but 180 degrees out of phase.
The fault will feel that difference and the resonant freq will be modulated at the 1/2 cycle difference, the 1/2 cycle plus the frequency, and the center frequency. If sustained and adjusted by phase carefully the fault which is two sheets of resonant rock will begin to jitter so slightly, but since it will do this for the total length of the slabs it will wear chips off the edges. If done long enough or with enough power the fault will eventually slip.
Ergo an Earthquake.
This earth is always vibrating. They dropped the bridge in California by having the vehicles simply bounce on pavements. Not intentionally, but effectively.
Sound is a part of every structure. That is why they put absorbers in the bases.
If you sit in a room and I pipe in sub audible sound aves of low frequencies I can cause you to be very angry. If they get low enough you will even get ill to your stomach. If they get really low like 6.5 to 7 cps you will eventually die.
Yes HAARP works!

Maybe, but not for weather modification as stated. All weather takes place in the troposphere, the area of the atmosphere nearest the ground. Heating or cooling of the ionosphere--about 45 miles above the troposphere--would have little or no effect on clouds or any other kind of weather.

As far as any other effects HAARP might have, that's well out of my area of expertise.

Onward and upward,
airforce

I suspect that if HAARP actually works it has fair more capabilities than any of us suspect. I also doubt if large sums of federal money would have been spent to build it if it didn't have perceived military applications.
Then again, it might just be the theme of a Michael Crichton novel and nothing more.

I don't know what the purpose of HAARP is. As I said, that's way out of my area. But the fact is, if you set off a nuke in the ionosphere, there would be no noticeable effect on the weather.

Onward and upward,
airforce

If they can focus energy at any altitude or below the surface at any place on the planet, the ionosphere limitation is a red herring.

If they could do that, they would truly have the ultimate weapon. Press a button in Alaska, and destroy an Iranian nuke on the other side of the planet. A weapon like that would sort of make all of us pretty impotent and obsolete. Let's hope they don't have it.

Onward and upward,
airforce

I have worried about it for about 10 years.

Airforce
The only reason they don't have that button is they share the Space station with foreign nations. To do anything except create seismic conditions like in Haiti and Fukishima is that to use the thing requires them to either have straight line access (Space based Initiative) or single bounce range. Once the signal bounces over one time it will not have the power or the phase shift needed to modulate.
In one story I heard on a talk panel to achieve the best results like in Haiti and Fukishima they need to place a resonating device into the rock.

On the face of it, I just don't think such a weapon is possible, at least with any technology available now or in the foreseeable future. As I've said, this is well out of my area of expertise, but such a device would require, at the very least, the suspension of Newton's Third Law of Dynamics.

Personally, I put claims such as these in the same category as perpetual motion machines, mermaids, and shape-shifting reptileans from the Perseids. Possible, I suppose, but I'd have to see it with my own eyes before I believe it.

Onward and upward,
airforce

Well, this seems related. An Iranian vice president somewhere (there seems to be a bunch of Iranian vice presidents) says that we're somehow responsible for a drought in the southern half of Iran.

R-i-g-h-t.

Onward and upward,
airforce