I'm sorry for DP, but I feel entitled to post another link (since we're at throwing links around) presenting the other side of the argument.
And as of my opinion, the wiki article given in the OP states that the HAARP directs a signal between 2.8-10MHz in the ionosphere. Given that radio waves (link) can vary between 3kHz and 300GHz, and taking into account we're constantly emitting radio waves out of all pores of the earth, I don't see the danger.
Lastly, if I might ask you a question, KnightDeclan. I am simply curious, because in another thread, you dismissed gravity arguing that you "don't believe in unvisible forces". Do you actually believe in radio waves?
I think our money should be going to things aside from machines which can change weather, cause destruction, or hurt us in any way. Let nature take its course.
Lastly, if I might ask you a question, KnightDeclan. I am simply curious, because in another thread, you dismissed gravity arguing that you "don't believe in invisible forces". Do you actually believe in radio waves?
If I told you what I really thought....I would lose the small amount of credibility I have. But Radio waves, microwaves, heat waves, and magnetic forces are different. They are caused by something. Gravity, on the other hand, has no source.
I think our money should be going to things aside from machines which can change weather, cause destruction, or hurt us in any way. Let nature take its course.
But those waves don't do all that. The facility sends those signals in the ionosphere and analyses how the ionosphere affects the signal. This has importance for perfecting radio signal transmission. It won't change the weather, and it certainly won't cause earthquakes, as I already showed that those waves are relatively weak compared to the strongest radio waves we already send out into space.
If I told you what I really thought....I would lose the small amount of credibility I have. But Radio waves, microwaves, heat waves, and magnetic forces are different. They are caused by something. Gravity, on the other hand, has no source.
Caused by visible things, I guess is your problem. We are in the process of finding out how the Higgs-boson can generate gravity. But whether we find out how it works, or not, something obviously is causing gravity; after all, independent of knowing how it is generated, we have been able to calculate using gravity as given (and get accurate, correct results) since Newton.
USE THE QUOTE BUTTON. USE THE QUOTE BUTTON. USE THE QUOTE BUTTON.
If I told you what I really thought....I would lose the small amount of credibility I have
You're already the person with the most ridiculous beliefs I've ever met. I wouldn't believe you from your word if you said you saw a duck outside, because you're so wrong about everything I'd assume it was a goose. Your credibility isn't small, it's as nonexistent as these abundance of conspiracy theories you think surround us.
the wiki article given in the OP states that the HAARP directs a signal between 2.8-10MHz in the ionosphere. Given that radio waves (link) can vary between 3kHz and 300GHz, and taking into account we're constantly emitting radio waves out of all pores of the earth, I don't see the danger.
Address this, KnightDeclan. Why is it HAARP that you think is a danger, when it's at the low end of the spectrum?
And...
USE THE QUOTE BUTTON. USE THE QUOTE BUTTON. USE THE QUOTE BUTTON.
If I told you what I really thought....I would lose the small amount of credibility I have.
You don't have any credibility to lose. It's baseless claims like in your link "HAARP is a weapon of mass destruction." that leave you without credibility.
I think our money should be going to things aside from machines which can change weather, cause destruction, or hurt us in any way. Let nature take its course.
HAARP Doesn't do any of those things, it's a monitoring device. Though a weather control device might not be a bad idea considering how we are at the whim of such powerful natural disasters. Though it would have to operate on a global level to prevent misuse as a weapon.
Yes, it does. And it is yet to be proven. And besides, if you ask yourself the question "Does God have a source?" you'd say God just is. So gravity is the same, it's existence may be subjective (you're the only subjection of gravity I've seen in my life to be honest) but facts of existence are not impossible to find. Make of that what you will.
If I told you what I really thought....I would lose the small amount of credibility I have. But Radio waves, microwaves, heat waves, and magnetic forces are different.
This isn't even subjective thinking anymore, this is just plain hypocritical behavior towards science. You cannot seriously think that just because something has been explained and the things yet to be explained must immediately be BS. You can't see radio waves with the naked eye, yet you believe in it. You can't see magnetism with your naked eye, yet you believe in it. Yet gravity, the protector of life in our great planet that has existed longer then you is deemed implausible. There is no logic in this statement. None what so ever.
You're already the person with the most ridiculous beliefs I've ever met. I wouldn't believe you from your word if you said you saw a duck outside, because you're so wrong about everything I'd assume it was a goose. Your credibility isn't small, it's as nonexistent as these abundance of conspiracy theories you think surround us.
You just said it has a source...then said it just is...
Read closer. He said there is a source, we just didn't find the source yet.
If we don't know the source yet, how can we know there is gravity? By it's effects. Throw a stone and see how it moves through the air, and make your conclusions. You now know something is acting on the stone. Physicists eventually found out how the observed effect behaves; we now have mathematical formulas that use gravity and give us the correct curve of an objects trajectory.
But as with anything, there has to be a cause to it. We haven't found it yet (although as I said, we are possibly getting closer with the Higgs boson), and that's why we're looking for it. We don't just accept that gravity is there; we just haven't had the means to analyse it until the CERN project.
Ever consider that you can't prove this drivel because it's not true? All you can do is make wild statements and point at things, whilst ignoring the valid explanations and reasons offered? That the only way this gibberish survives is because you ignore every source and attempt at someone telling you how it's false?
Read closer. He said there is a source, we just didn't find the source yet.
Exactly my point. And to be honest, I'm doing research in gravity. There are multiple different theoretical explanations to gravity. In due time the cause of gravity will be proven.
If we don't know the source yet, how can we know there is gravity? By it's effects.
Yup, Issac Newton. The apple falling on his head was not just a footnote. And from the information just a simple everyday person can gather, gravity has been around for a while. Even in the Triassic period, which was a little over 230 million years ago. Gravity may have been lighter during this period but it was there. Just as it is now.
But as with anything, there has to be a cause to it. We haven't found it yet (although as I said, we are possibly getting closer with the Higgs boson), and that's why we're looking for it. We don't just accept that gravity is there; we just haven't had the means to analyse it until the CERN project.
I'd be interested in seeing what the Higgs Boson could do. It would definitely be a sight to see if gravity was explained.
What? How do you figure that? The only reasoning I can think of is because of the size of the animals, you're basing it off an assumption that their hearts wouldn't have been able to pump blood up that far in such large amounts.
I don't see any reason why gravity would be less then.
