Jump to content

Janet W

Members
  • Posts

    887
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by Janet W

  1. More HAARP operation on 27 December. Did the HAARP followers detect it? [/quote] The HAARP Program Office just now issued the attached Notice of Transmission for the Asteroid Bounce Experiment on 27 December 2022. The transmission frequency is 9.6 MHz with 30 kHz Linear Frequency Modulation (LFM) and waveform repetition frequency (WRF) of 0.5 Hz. This means the Ionospheric Research Instrument (IRI) at HAARP will repetitively sweep from 9.585 to 9.615 MHz in 2 seconds. The transmitted signals may be receivable at various locations around the world but the received echos will be extremely weak. Large arrays in New Mexico and California will be listening. The associated campaign media image also is attached, and the press release can be viewed here: HAARP to bounce signal off asteroid in NASA experiment [quote/]
  2. Janet W

    Mark Steele - 5G

    What ever happened to "weapons expert" Mark Steele? A couple of years ago he was busy showing street-lights with high-voltage capacitors in standard switched-mode power supplies and pointing to quarter-wave vertical UHF monopole antennas tuned to about 880 MHz and claiming his electronics expertise indicated it's all part of a microwave phased energy weapon. Anyone with even a bit of electronics knowledge knew that he was talking bollox. All SMPS contain high voltage capacitors, and quarter-wave vertical antennas cut for about 800MHz are neither part of a phased array nor designed for microwaves. So why does a street light need an antenna anyway? It's just used for sensing tiny amounts of telemetry data and fault reporting. Pretty scary ehh...? If he was right all along he must have amassed huge quantities of evidence by now. I wonder where it is...?
  3. Hi there. More HAARP testing in a few days. Since nothing spectacular happened last time it was operated (or did I miss it?) earlier in the year, maybe this time...? For those with a short wave radio living in the reception zone, below is the transmission schedule complete with frequencies so anyone can check the suspicious activity. It's so powerful that anyone with a basic SW radio can receive the signal themselves, so it's not as if it can be operated clandestinely. https://ghostsintheairglow.space/transmission/october-2022
  4. Yes, that's a good site with real data aimed at radio amateurs and other users of the HF spectrum. The nonsense about the CME/flare knocking stuff out is as you say fear porn written by non-technical hack who just want a catchy/scary story - sound familiar? It does knock out HF communication and some HF radar, but unless you have any dealing with that branch of the RF spectrum it'll pass by without 99% of people noticing - although you might get a good auroral display...
  5. I'm not a meteorologist either, but I do have a science background and know how to assess data. My partner is a statistician and he can assess cumulative data that the 40C in the UK (and Europe) is in statistical terms 'a super deviation'. Meaning it is very unusual and not likely caused by random variation. But it's the recent cumulative data that is also somewhat worrying. Many of these threads are full of posts by well-meaning people who read some non-scientific sites and just repeat stuff without understanding the evidence; but it fits with their world view, so must be true and anyone contradicting them is obviously part of the conspiracy. You know, it would really be refreshing if we had some amateur experts (cos all the professionals are obviously part of the cover-up) who understand the data, the accuracy (or not) of the observations, and who can cut through the conspiratorial bull sh!t. Yes, 'experts' do get quoted here sometimes, but by people who are not really equipped to know if they really are 'experts' or just self publicists. Unfortunately true experts rarely join these forums because they know they'd be wasting their time presenting information to those whose minds are made up, and so have probably got better things to do. That's a shame because alternative views and evidence-based discussion is good for everyone.
  6. Are there any amateur meteorologists on the forum who can give some informed input regarding the recent UK weather?
  7. Looking back on their posts, I suspect at least one of them is an experimental artificial intelligence chat-bot! They have all the signs of not quite understanding the question, unable to asses information, not really answering anything clearly and directly, and using a somewhat convoluted word salad in how they do reply. When you think about it, forums like this (where such posters seem to proliferate) would be an ideal testing ground for AI, covering a wide range of topics outside conventional conversations. However, it seems the technology has some way to go...
  8. No answer as the reply. Apparently way above the comprehension level. Oh dear, people are watching this zArk character...
  9. So what has the dome got to do with it? Is it transparent to RF? Which satellites are inside it and which outside? If inside please explain the apparent mechanics and if outside how did they get through? Or are you just taking the p!ss and you don't believe this nonsense any more than anyone else? How much experience do you have in relevant subjects? Just asking for a friend.
  10. You can see them with your own eyes FFS! You don't need a photo that you'll claim is fake. Tell you what, on a clear night look up where the ISS will be over your location. Phone a chum say 200 miles away and get them to look at about the same time. Heavens.above.com (or any satellite tracking site) will give you the EXACT times of visibility at your locations, but they will vary slightly as it moves in orbit. I'm giving you this example so you don't claim it's just a plane. No planes appear at nearly the same time in the same place moving in the same direction 200 miles apart. Get a telescope out and you might even be able to see its outline shape. You can do this with any LEO satellite, but the ISS is easily the brightest and easiest to identify. Surely you can do that...?
  11. @zArk Interesting reply. My background is in communications - both HF and satellite. Simple proof to me the Earth is a sphere is reciprocal, great circle bearing reception on HF. Not possible on a flat Earth. Even non-reciprocal bearings would be way out on a flat Earth! I think we'd notice... (If you're unfamiliar with reciprocal bearings in HF communications you may like to look them up to understand what I mean.) I've steered satellite dishes using a polar mount for reception of satellites in the Clarke belt in geostationary orbit and had to take account of the propagation delay caused by their distance and the speed of light. How do the satellites stay up on a flat Earth? How does a polar mount follow geostationary satellites on a flat earth? (Again, you might like to investigate polar mount satellite dishes.) I suppose if you're not familiar with the test equipment or the techniques then it's easy to question stuff. But an explanation wouldn't be understood without the background knowledge. That sounds condescending, but it's true. I don't know any engineers who work in the real world which works just as if it were a sphere who believe it's flat. If the world is flat how do - for example - communications links work using global/great circle bearings if it's really flat?
  12. We're still debating this after so many posts. Fine that someone has a genuine curiosity, engages in debate (in a subject that was proved millennia ago, but anyway...), but I don't get it when evidence is posted and it's just denied - without any comprehension of what is being presented. You could take one of these characters outside to watch some very basic Earth-Moon-Earth (Moon-bounce) communication on 145 MHz. You could demonstrate and explain the propagation delay, path loss, polarisation shifts, Doppler shift, etc. and they'd just shrug. Not having sufficient critical thinking or comprehension skills (let alone a basic understanding of science) they'd have no idea what was being demonstrated. If anyone is not the 'full ticket' I suppose that is the only response. It's fascinating to me to think how these people function in the real world on a daily basis when they can't tell the difference between facts, opinion, belief and evidence. Or have I got the wrong end of the stick and am taking it all far to seriously? These folks are just having a laugh to see who takes the bate (like me!) cos they know the world isn't flat and they love to engage in a pointless argument.
  13. Yes, tropo can certainly cause ducting at UHF and microwaves. I was trying to keep it simple without someone thinking that's how satellites work! First time I ever got on 2m/144 MHz it was full of Italian stations. "This is good" I thought, but was just an excellent burst of sporadic-E that afternoon in 1980! You get these characters here who come out with all sorts of weird stuff, but don't have a shred of understanding. Ho-hum...
  14. Yes! That happens in the ionosphere at heights of between 50 km and 250 km with frequencies from about 100 kHz up to about 50 MHz. Above about 50 - 70 MHz there is insufficient ionisation to reflect (actually refract) radio signals back to Earth. However, you presumably are unfamiliar with the frequencies used for satellite TV signals (for example) so I'll tell you; 3 to 4 GHz and 11 to 12 GHz. Check out Lyngsat.com for thousands if painfully made-up satellite TV and radio channels that presumably no one has ever received cos they are all fake! (Actually they're real and you can check if you want to receive one of them by pointing your dish in the right direction.) If you can come up with evidence - or at least theory - of how3 GHz or 11 GHz signals "bounce off a layer in the sky", you win. Have you ever heard of OSCAR communications? I don't expect you have. You need to know about orbits, antenna beamwidths, path loss, Doppler shift, etc. and it's something thousands of radio amateurs do. By the way, you can see low earth orbit satellites with the naked eye if you know when and where to look using something like https://www.heavens-above.com/ Anyway, we'll wait for your detailed response...
  15. Excellent video of satellites and a flat Earth. But it was here somewhere that the Flatties were claiming satellites didn't exist, it was all terrestrial transmissions (oblivious to sat dishes pointing in the same direction for say the 13E) or some BS about them really being all balloons. Are the proponents still around to argue their case?
  16. Blimey. It's been a few hours since this tragedy. Has no one here yet repeated the this-is-to-promote-gun-control, false-flag, crisis actors memes yet?
  17. Not ignored. The ex-military woman isn't saying anything new, nor presenting any evidence. I can stand up and just claim that sort of stuff - though not as young or glam! Ted Gunderson is interesting. Doing a bit of research reveals he made numerous extraordinary claims, like 4,000 ritual sacrifices in NYC annually...
  18. OK. Let's just find someone who is involved in this massive industrial process. Look at the skies some days. Seemingly thick with the stuff. If it's as pervasive as many think - given the evidence in the skies - it must be a massive industrial process. Where are the raw materials coming from, how are they being transported, where are they being processed and which planes are specifically responsible?
  19. Indeed. But those are only relatively short interruptions of the operation of jet engines which they are (mostly) designed to survive. Continuous use of a fuel additive for which the engine is not designed will eventual cause a noticeable decline in performance and damage. (The story about some intern being asked to get chickens for this test and coming back with frozen ones, I believe is apocryphal!)
  20. Oh dear! I didn't say it wasn't happening (although I think small scale weather modification is). I just gave my reasons why I don't think chemicals are 'smuggled' into aviation fuel on commercial jets or involves the connivance of personnel working in those fields. But I'm still waiting for the evidence of special aircraft doing this. The skies are full of 'chemtrails' some days so there must be thousands of them. Where are they taking off and landing from? Who is maintaining them? And most of all where are all the thousands and thousands of tons of the stuff being manufactured, and distributed without anyone knowing anyone who is involved in this massive operation?
  21. You are correct. The cabin crew have nothing to do with the maintenance of the aircraft - short of pointing out things like bad air-con, galley equipment faults or other generally minor problems. But the engineers tasked with maintaining the engines know what they're doing and what to look for. Not only that, routine engine swapping between aircraft is done to spread operating hours and closely check for wear, etc. which would show up if fuel that varied from the very specific formula for which the engines were designed was ever used. Before anyone suggests the chemicals are kept in special tanks completely separate from the fuel, each aircraft has a known laden weight. Not only that but airport load control know what that is, so airport staff and the pilots would certainly be aware of anything that caused their maximum cargo weight (even on passenger jets) or handling to be incorrect. I find following a conspiracy is great fun. Unfortunately knowing what would be involved to make it happen can be deeply disappointing... :(
  22. Perhaps you haven't worked in a test environment where results are matched across lots of teams - sometimes internationally - against base-line measurements. And I'll repeat; jet engines are designed to run on specifically formulated fuel. Any additive will not only show up in performance tests, but will leave evidence in the combustion chambers, or might even cause engine damage that would require expensive investigation and repair.
  23. Except that would damage the precision engineered jet engines, alerting all the international maintenance engineers. Not to mention the aviation fuel test labs all over the world who asses the chemical balance and quality of the fuel prior to fuelling. So I can't see it being 'smuggled' into aviation fuel past a whole chain of a people and tests. Unless you believe thousands are involved in this conspiracy. We need a fuel-test or engine mechanic whistle-blower. Surely from all those involved there must be dozens by now...?
×
×
  • Create New...