Weather Warfare: Good idea, bad idea??

[Lunar4]

Weather Warfare: Beware the US military’s experiments with climatic warfare.
‘Climatic warfare’ has been excluded from the agenda on climate change.

"HAARP is a weapon of mass destruction, capable of destabilising agricultural and ecological systems globally."

"‘Climatic warfare’ potentially threatens the future of humanity, but has casually been excluded from the reports for which the IPCC received the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize."

Rarely acknowledged in the debate on global climate change, the world’s weather can now be modified as part of a new generation of sophisticated electromagnetic weapons. Both the US and Russia have developed capabilities to manipulate the climate for military use.

Environmental modification techniques have been applied by the US military for more than half a century. US mathematician John von Neumann, in liaison with the US Department of Defense, started his research on weather modification in the late 1940s at the height of the Cold War and foresaw ‘forms of climatic warfare as yet unimagined’. During the Vietnam war, cloud-seeding techniques were used, starting in 1967 under Project Popeye, the objective of which was to prolong the monsoon season and block enemy supply routes along the Ho Chi Minh Trail.

The US military has developed advanced capabilities that enable it selectively to alter weather patterns. The technology, which is being perfected under the High-frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP), is an appendage of the Strategic Defense Initiative – ‘Star Wars’. From a military standpoint, HAARP is a weapon of mass destruction, operating from the outer atmosphere and capable of destabilising agricultural and ecological systems around the world.

Weather-modification, according to the US Air Force document AF 2025 Final Report, ‘offers the war fighter a wide range of possible options to defeat or coerce an adversary’, capabilities, it says, extend to the triggering of floods, hurricanes, droughts and earthquakes: ‘Weather modification will become a part of domestic and international security and could be done unilaterally… It could have offensive and defensive applications and even be used for deterrence purposes. The ability to generate precipitation, fog and storms on earth or to modify space weather… and the production of artificial weather all are a part of an integrated set of [military] technologies.’

In 1977, an international Convention was ratified by the UN General Assembly which banned ‘military or other hostile use of environmental modification techniques having widespread, long-lasting or severe effects.’ It defined ‘environmental modification techniques’ as ‘any technique for changing –through the deliberate manipulation of natural processes – the dynamics, composition or structure of the earth, including its biota, lithosphere, hydrosphere and atmosphere, or of outer space.’

While the substance of the 1977 Convention was reasserted in the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) signed at the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio, debate on weather modification for military use has become a scientific taboo.

Military analysts are mute on the subject. Meteorologists are not investigating the matter and environmentalists are focused on greenhouse gas emissions under the Kyoto Protocol. Neither is the possibility of climatic or environmental manipulations as part of a military and intelligence agenda, while tacitly acknowledged, part of the broader debate on climate change under UN auspices.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.p...xt=va&aid=7561

So is Weather Warfare a good or bad thing?

It would certainly help if our country was being invaded or something, but who is gonna invade the U.S? no one.

so does that mean we would use it against foreign countries? North Korea? Is it even smart to use such a dangerous weapon?

come on guys. this thing is tearing holes in our only ionosphere. Surely that must seem somewhat... arrogant?:hmmm:

[LSJ]

The concept is of a retarded Hitlerite.

Why not just take all the lead, U236, and arsenic in the world and dump it on your enemy's country? That is just as foolproof as ****ing with the weather.

And IMO the weapon has no place in a society which despises those who commit atrocities upon the populace for their own gains.

[Kiki52]

Such a weapon like weather warfare would probably do something bad then it'll destroy the world and billions of people. We might not even have a nation called the USA anymore to call home. If you open Pandora's Box, you might get burnt.

[Medicus]

America: proving, once again, that idiocy knows no bounds.

[Thanatos]

America: proving, once again, that idiocy knows no bounds.

[Medicus]

Sorry if I'm offending, but it's backed up isn't it?

When America should be invested in alternate energy sources, health care, education, reducing their impact on the environment, what do they do? Creat a weather control machine and a invisible tank that isn't quite invisible.

[L'Afrique]

Sorry if I'm offending, but it's backed up isn't it?

When America should be invested in alternate energy sources, health care, education, reducing their impact on the environment, what do they do? Creat a weather control machine and a invisible tank that isn't quite invisible.

You're right. All Americans are morons, just like all old Germans are mindless killing machines.

[Centurion-Lucius-Vorenus]

You're right. All Americans are morons, just like all old Germans are mindless killing machines.

Most of us are really morons.

And you can't control the weather, you can do things to influence it but you can never bend it to your will.

[Rhinosaur]

America: proving, once again, that idiocy knows no bounds.

I voted in favor of weather manipulation in part to destroy physically anyone who agrees with this, but also to destroy most people who disagree, and all who are indifferent. Pretty much, I want the whole world to die in a big storm or something.

[Captain Blackadder]

Well if weather manipulation worked well it would be a great humanatarian way of waging war due to the fact that that large cyclones and things like that cause huge damage to building yet leave humans relativly untouched. However if hollywood has taught me anything (which it hasen't) messing around with the weather is a bad idea.

[Sidmen]

As far as I can tell, the British invented the invisible tank.

[Medicus]

As far as I can tell, the British invented the invisible tank.

Was it? I swore it was American. It was being tested on an Abrams, anyway.

[Sidmen]

I'm pretty sure its British. And its being tested on a challenger.

LINK
Of course, they say the daily mail is a poor source, but I don't see the harm.

[ajm317]

My favorite part about this thread is that Lunar4 (of all people) comes in and tells you that the U.S. has weather manipulation weapons straight out of science fiction and nobody questions it.

Here's what Wikipedia has to say about HAARP. It is considerably less...controversial than the link provided.

The High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP) is an investigation project to "understand, simulate and control ionospheric processes that might alter the performance of communication and surveillance systems." Started in 1993, the project is proposed to last for a period of twenty years

Oh man, those North Koreans better be scared.

The critics' views have been rejected by the HAARP's defenders, who have pointed out that the amount of energy at the project's disposal is minuscule compared to the colossal energies dumped into the atmosphere by solar radiation and thunderstorms. A University of Alaska Fairbanks Geophysical Institute scientist has compared the HAARP to an "immersion heater in the Yukon River."

Since the ionosphere is inherently a chaotically turbulent region, HAARP's defenders state any artificially induced changes would be "swept clean" within seconds or minutes at the most. Ionospheric heating experiments performed at the Arecibo Observatory's ionospheric heater and incoherent scatter radar have shown that after periods of modification (up to an hour), the ionosphere returns to normal within about the same period of time it had been heated.

For instance, HAARP generates 3.6 megawatts (MW) of power. 3.6 MW is considered a minuscule percentage of the energy compared to all of the energy constantly injected into the Earth, and the ionosphere, by the sun.

Furthermore, supporters of HAARP argue that its activities have been, since its establishment, extremely open. All activities are logged and publicly available. Scientists without security clearances, even foreign national scientists, are routinely allowed on site. The HAARP facility regularly hosts open houses, during which time any civilian may tour the entire facility. Many people see this as a sign that the facility is not engaging in the type of extremely questionable research that is suggested by many critics.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haarp

Military analysts are mute on the subject. Meteorologists are not investigating the matter and environmentalists are focused on greenhouse gas emissions under the Kyoto Protocol. Neither is the possibility of climatic or environmental manipulations as part of a military and intelligence agenda, while tacitly acknowledged, part of the broader debate on climate change under UN auspices.

...Or maybe the UN, military analysts, environmentalists and meteorologists all know there's nothing to talk about.

Nah. That couldn't be it.

[JP226]

sounds like the whole blackhole simulation in switzerland(?) that everyone thinks will destroy the planet...

[Spurius]

Well, in his patent application the inventor makes no big secret about its applicability as a weapon - or weather altering machine, for that matter ...

http://www.airapparent.ca/library/ab...6_eastlund.htm

[ajm317]

Well, in his patent application the inventor makes no big secret about its applicability as a weapon - or weather altering machine, for that matter ...

http://www.airapparent.ca/library/ab...6_eastlund.htm

However, Eastlund's ideas were eventually dropped as SDI itself mutated into the more limited National Missile Defense of today. The contractors selected to build HAARP have denied that any of Eastlund's patents were used in the development of the project.

come on guys. this thing is tearing holes in our only ionosphere. Surely that must seem somewhat... arrogant?

Can HAARP create a hole in the ionosphere?
No. Any effects produced by HAARP are miniscule compared with the natural day-night variations that occur in the ionosphere. Several ionospheric layers completely disappear naturally over a whole hemisphere during the evening hours. HAARP can't come close to producing this effect, even in the limited region directly over the site.

[Spurius]

Originally Posted by Wiki
However, Eastlund's ideas were eventually dropped as SDI itself mutated into the more limited National Missile Defense of today. The contractors selected to build HAARP have denied that any of Eastlund's patents were used in the development of the project.

According to my info that's not entirely correct. The patents are a bit hard to follow, with esystems bying APTI, and Raytheon esystems, but US-Patent Nr. 5.041.834 - August 1991 was tested as late as September 1995 - ten years after the first patents, and way after the Raytheon entry into the field.

[ajm317]

According to my info that's not entirely correct. The patents are a bit hard to follow, with esystems bying APTI, and Raytheon esystems, but US-Patent Nr. 5.041.834 - August 1991 was tested as late as September 1995 - ten years after the first patents, and way after the Raytheon entry into the field.

I'm afraid I don't understand what your point is. Here is the patent number you reference:

5041834

It's not held by Eastlund, and since I didn't cite any patent number I certainly never claimed it was used to build HAARP. I'm also not sure how Raytheon fits in to anything. I am not aware, for example, of Eastland working for Raytheon.

You're going to have to be a bit more clear.

Even if you could prove that an Eastlund patent WAS used to build HAARP it's obvious that HAARP is not a weapon, so I don't know what the point is. It just doesn't have enough power to be used as such, plus it's a completely declassified project.

[Spurius]

I only had 2 points to make:

- the invention was never intended as weapon/weather machine [false]

- Eastlund patents were never used in any way, later - this one references 2 [therefore also false]

It's probably all above board these days, but those two things, plus the phrasing of the original patent, make for disturbing reading.

Seems a bit strange to ignore that and hand-wave it dismissively.

Other than that, who's to say the technology wasn't deemed to be ineffective if ground-based anyway, beside all the political fallout - and is now safely inside satellites in a modified form. Once perfected, high-tech stuffs' power requirements drop by a large factor, usually.