Microwaves could control the hurricanes and the weather itself,according to scientist

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/opinion/content/opinion/epaper/2004/10/07/a18a_versteeg_1007.html

Thursday, October 07, 2004

Last month in this space, I explained why it's morally OK to wish that hurricanes would hit somebody else. Ordinary people can't create or control hurricanes — though watching Jeanne approach, I wished more than ever that there was some way to steer them.

Now comes the October Scientific American with this cover story: "Controlling Hurricanes. Ways to Tame Nature's Most Destructive Storms."

The article, by Ross N. Hoffman, says it is scientifically feasible to make hurricanes weaker or to change a storm's path to avoid populated areas. "If meteorological control does turn out to work at some point in the future," the author writes, "it would raise serious political problems. What if intervention causes a hurricane to damage another country's territory? And, although the use of weather modification as a weapon was banned by a United Nations Convention in the late 1970s, some countries might be tempted."

The basic point is that greater control over nature entails greater moral responsibility. While scientific achievements have been used for great good, they've also been co-opted to inflict great harm. Wisdom doesn't always keep up with scientific know-how. Even more daunting is that wisdom and good intentions need to be universal. Many countries use nuclear power peacefully. There's good reason to worry about how North Korea and Iran intend to use it.

But, frankly, after Frances and Jeanne here and Ivan and Charley in other parts of the state, I'm ready for the hurricane know-how to arrive as quickly as possible. Too bad Dr. Hoffman says meaningful control probably is decades away. He notes that in the 1960s, Project Stormfury tried without success to weaken hurricanes by seeding clouds near the eye wall.

So how does Dr. Hoffman think scientists can control hurricanes? First, here's why he thinks scientists can control hurricanes. Hurricanes operate according to rules. But they appear random and chaotic because the rules are so complex. Very little changes have big consequences down the road. Complexity and sensitivity make hurricanes devilishly hard to predict — as those of us who watched in dread as Hurricane Jeanne's course shifted west can attest.

The problem is that there's still no way to measure accurately the myriad things scientists would need to know to pinpoint a hurricane's path and intensity. What's the water temperature? How wet or dry is the air? What about those "ridges" that pop up — or down — to make the hurricane veer? Without a very accurate picture of the hurricane right now, you can't get a very accurate picture of where the hurricane will be in three or five days. The smallest goof in assumptions, and Jeanne hits Florida instead of swinging north offshore. But the extreme sensitivity also means that "slight, purposely applied inputs to a hurricane might generate powerful effects that could influence the storms, whether by steering them away from population centers or by reducing their wind speeds."

The article proposes several ways scientists might alter a hurricane's "inputs." There's still some hope that cloud-seeding could drain the eye wall of moisture it needs to strengthen. Earth-orbiting solar power stations could be used to beam microwaves near or into storms, controlling the heat at various junctures and steering or weakening the hurricane. Ordering jets to fly along certain paths could leave contrail cloud cover that affects the storm.

Or, and this is my favorite because it's something I almost can understand, scientists could spread a biodegradable oil slick in front of the storm. The oil would reduce evaporation, cutting off the fuel that makes storms intensify.

In a computer simulation based on data from Hurricane Andrew, which blew away sections of Miami-Dade County in 1992, Dr. Hoffman found that if there had been some way to cool parts of the hurricane a few degrees, winds could have been reduced below 56 mph. In real life, Andrew was a Category 5 storm, with winds above 155 mph.

The scientific ability to control hurricanes would impose new moral burdens. But if humans might control the storms to protect life and property, isn't there a moral obligation to learn how?



And another link:
http://www.foundrymusic.com/BRAINCANDY/displayheadline.cfm?the_date=&postfart=go&id=6383

Space age plan to tame might of hurricanes

Microwave radiation and controlled oil slicks could change the path and sap the power of tropical storms


Scientists are developing techniques aimed at taming the power of the world's most devastating storms. The project, backed by funds from Nasa, would involve seeding clouds, coating seas with biodegradable 'slicks' and even beaming microwave radiation from orbiting power stations to slow or even halt hurricanes.

Controlling these great, rolling tempests - known as hurricanes in the Atlantic, typhoons in the western Pacific and cyclones in the eastern Pacific - is now considered an urgent priority. Last month Hurricane Ivan killed more than 70 people and destroyed thousands of homes, miles of roads, swaths of vegetation and scores of hotels as it swept over Grenada, Jamaica, Tobago, the Cayman Islands, the Dominican Republic, Haiti and finally Cuba. Three similar recent storms caused the same kind of devastation, and meteorologists predict the next two decades will see increases in numbers and severity of hurricanes. Global warming is likely to worsen the problem.

'Nothing stands in the way of hurricanes,' says Ross Hoffman, in the current issue of Scientific American. 'But must these fearful forces be forever beyond our control?' The answer is 'no', he adds, for one day they could be controlled thanks to developments in computing, satellite technology and material sciences.

Backed by Nasa funds, his team of scientists at Atmospheric and Environmental Research, a research and development consulting firm, have created computer simulations of past hurricanes, including Hurricane Iniki which caused enormous damage to the Hawaiian island Kauai in 1992, and Hurricane Andrew, which devastated south Florida in the same year. To their surprise they found that by making only relatively small changes to temperatures and other meteorological variables they could induce major alterations in its path and behaviour. Slight tinkering sent Iniki on a route that missed Kauai, for example. 'The question is: how can such perturbations be achieved?' asks Hoffman.

The team has proposed several answers. One is to coat the ocean in front of a hurricane with a biodegradable oil which would slow the evaporation of water from the sea surface, depriving the developing storm of its sustenance. Another technique is to seed the eyes of hurricanes with silver iodide crystals, speeding formation of ice from water vapour. Spread by aircraft, these seed clouds could cause hurricanes to dissipate, although the group acknowledges that early tests have been only partially successful.
The ultimate technique would be the construction of a flotilla of orbiting power stations that would collect the Sun's rays and beam them to Earth as microwave radiation. These satellites are considered a promising, non-polluting energy source for the future, but could also be used to heat the sea and air around hurricanes, altering their paths and dissipating their energy.


So what do you think?
Could with scientists with power stations which generate the energy of 10 quatrillion watts be able to alter,weaken,or change the path of an hurricane and hav the total control over Earth's weather,as well as have total control over Earth's entire atmospheric system?
Any opinions?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

basically destroying all the fish and the biomass underneath the ocean...nice idea...sort of like nature's own terrorist

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Don't fuck with mother nature, even with good intentions.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

My hypothesis is that it won't work. But wait and see.

 

haarp technology is a reality
and it can control the weather
check out the book "angels don't play this haarp"
or google haarp for more info

this is one of the main reasons i do not beleive that global warming is not occuring naturaly

 

No one can control the weather.

 

"Weather modification is possible by, for example, altering upper atmosphere wind patterns by constructing one or more plumes of atmospheric particles which will act as a lens or focusing device.
http://www.haarp.net/




Lots of people know that Nicola Tesla patented weather influencing machinery before 1910, and explained how it could be used to control weather thousands of miles away. Not only can the technology be used to guide moisture laden air to drought stricken locations, but it can keep moisture away from droughts as well.

What can be achieved is a barrier to wind flow called a stationary pressure front, which forces weather away from its natural destination. The modern name for a device of this type is an atmospheric heater, which works by beaming concentrated radiowaves tuned to heat some component of the atmosphere.
http://www.wealth4freedom.com/truth/6/HAARP.htm

 

The links you give suggest radio waves contributing to a gradual increase in temperature.

Whether or not microwaves directed at storm fronts or hurricane formation centers can cause enough of a thermal gradient to disrupt their formation remains to be seen.

 

>>>> It seems likely that its power will be used to increase the final moment of terror before the New World Order coup.

http://www.wealth4freedom.com/truth/6/HAARP.htm

riiiiight.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

In the broadest sense, weather-modification can be divided into two major categories: suppression and intensification of weather patterns. In extreme cases, it might involve the creation of completely new weather patterns, attenuation or control of severe storms, or even alteration of global climate on a far-reaching and/or long-lasting scale.

Extreme and controversial examples of weather modification-creation of made-to-order weather, large-scale climate modification, creation and/or control (or "steering") of severe storms, etc.-were researched as part of this study... the weather-modification applications proposed in this report range from technically proven to potentially feasible.
http://worldvisionportal.org/wvpforum/viewtopic.php?t=296

 

...This effect came to be known as the butterfly effect. The amount of difference in the starting points of the two curves is so small that it is comparable to a butterfly flapping its wings.


The flapping of a single butterfly's wing today produces a tiny change in the state of the atmosphere. Over a period of time, what the atmosphere actually does diverges from what it would have done. So, in a month's time, a tornado that would have devastated the Indonesian coast doesn't happen. Or maybe one that wasn't going to happen, does. (Ian Stewart, Does God Play Dice? The Mathematics of Chaos, pg. 141)
This phenomenon, common to chaos theory, is also known as sensitive dependence on initial conditions. Just a small change in the initial conditions can drastically change the long-term behavior of a system. Such a small amount of difference in a measurement might be considered experimental noise, background noise, or an inaccuracy of the equipment. Such things are impossible to avoid in even the most isolated lab. With a starting number of 2, the final result can be entirely different from the same system with a starting value of 2.000001. It is simply impossible to achieve this level of accuracy - just try and measure something to the nearest millionth of an inch!

From this idea, Lorenz stated that it is impossible to predict the weather accurately. However, this discovery led Lorenz on to other aspects of what eventually came to be known as chaos theory.

And by implication, impossible to control, only to influence with unpredictable results.

 

World renowned scientist Dr. Rosalie Bertell confirms that "US military scientists ... are working on weather systems as a potential weapon. The methods include the enhancing of storms and the diverting of vapor rivers in the Earth's atmosphere to produce targeted droughts or floods." (2) Already in the 1970s, former National Security advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski had foreseen in his book "Between Two Ages" that:
"Technology will make available, to the leaders of major nations, techniques for conducting secret warfare, of which only a bare minimum of the security forces need be appraised... [T]echniques of weather modification could be employed to produce prolonged periods of drought or storm."
Marc Filterman, a former French military officer, outlines several types of "unconventional weapons" using radio frequencies. He refers to "weather war," indicating that the U.S. and the Soviet Union had already "mastered the know-how needed to unleash sudden climate changes (hurricanes, drought) in the early 1980s."(3) These technologies make it "possible to trigger atmospheric disturbances by using Extremely Low Frequency (ELF) radar [waves]." (4)

A simulation study of future defense "scenarios" commissioned for the US Air Force calls for:

"US aerospace forces to 'own the weather' by capitalizing on emerging technologies and focusing development of those technologies to war-fighting applications... From enhancing friendly operations or disrupting those of the enemy via small-scale tailoring of natural weather patterns to complete dominance of global communications and counterspace control, weather-modification offers the war fighter a wide-range of possible options to defeat or coerce an adversary... In the United States, weather-modification will likely become a part of national security policy with both domestic and international applications. Our government will pursue such a policy, depending on its interests, at various levels.(5)

The use of HAARP -- if it were to be applied -- could have potentially devastating impacts on the World's climate. Responding to US economic and strategic interests, it could be used to selectively modify climate in different parts of the World resulting in the destabilization of agricultural and ecological systems.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO201A.p.html

 

Spidergoat,this is where you and me have the same language.I completely agree with,we shouldn't screw with the Mother Nature.In the end it is the nature who has the final word,not man and his technology.Although you can't prove to people,who always dreams about controlling the weather.
We would be only to modificate weather,but control it,forget it.
Can we control genetically modified food,can we control viruses and bacteries,can we control the modifications that we started in all the areas mentioned above?
The simplest and the shortest answer is that we can't and that we would never be able to control any of the above:there will be always new forms of viruses and bacteries,for example:and even if we found cure for some of disaeses,the new diseases are much more complex and will get more,more and more complex and impossible to find cure(AIDS and Ebola for example).
Nature always gives us an anti-response.
Man,you can't control nature,you can only modified it-but the process you started with this modification can't be stopped,it can be again modified but never controled in the way humans want to!
An scientist said:Maybe we can't start the modifications of nature and modified more,and more,but we can't control it anymore once it passed its limit.
I agree with him.

 

Yes,I agree,tryong to control weather will only bring into changes,but the weather itself can't be controlled.Controlling the weather is much like changing weather whenever you like at your will,but this will never be possible.no matter how much energy of microwaves we put into the weather.

 

The problem with trying to control such storms is that when they reach a certain mass and speed they start to generate an electromagnetic reactions from static, which would more than likely knock out any telemetry readings in relationship to controlling them since electrical storms cause arc's.

It's notible that storms of this nature would be easier to start though, because usually when they generate such static, it's caused by hail and hail stones are obviously large enough to manipulate in comparison to molecules.

 

If they keep screwing with the weather system (if its true), I wouldn't
be one bit suprised if the earth didn't shoot a blast of "static discharge"
and shut everybody down once and for all. ..,

 

Interesting. If they revive the project, there's gonna be a lot of angry fundies and environmentalists at hand to deal with. I am possibly one of them, but I am too curious if it'll work. Eventually I reckon the social consequences will bring this whole thing down, especially if it is proven to work. So small chance it will be used on a regular basis in the near future.

 

don't forget that we are talking military here
you know, stuff like area 51 ?
yes we do know it exists but we have no idea what goes on there

the fact is that we have the technology

do you remember when they blamed the weather patterns on "el nino"?
they don't even mention that now
now it's "global warming"

in my opinion they are capable of causeing droughts and rainy seasons, tornados and hurricanes

 

1.OK,Stryder and OTHERS,TOO could you give me an example how would this go:
So,ok we sent an energy beam of 10 quintillion watts on and hurricane of 5th category-what would happen than-this energy beam tries to control an 5th category hurricane in order to sap hurricane's strength or move it where there are no cities,what would than happen all power systems(computer systems,what would happen to nuclear power plants,termo-plants and etc.)?

How do you think this planetary electromagnetic shutdown process should go?
Thanks a lot for incoming answers.


2.One hypothetical question:
Let's suppose that in some hypothetical other-reality situation electric shutdown of electromagnetic power systems don't occur(actually let's say electromagnetic computer and other systems are immune to these electric shutdowns).

Than what would happen if we succeed in ovepowering hurricane's energy levels?
What would happen than?
My opinion:
The thing is if we use microwaves of greater energy level than that of hurricane we will be able to disupt these energies,and make the imbalance in energy system.In order to save the balance of the energy,the imbalance of energy that we made with high-energy microwaves.Everything in nature tends to maintain the balance so does energies in the hurricanes.The difference of energy level might disrupt hurricane,but it will also create new storms in order to maintain the balance,since the diffenrece between the enrgies must be compensated.Much like in the sun where the left energy between gravity and pressure reproduces energy that is sent to Earth in the form of light and heat.

What would be your opinions on this scenario I wrote?
Thanks a lot for the answer!
That's all,again thanks!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now,Ill' give only additional information about hurricanes:
Here is why weather control with silver idodide,dry ice and other chemical stuff will never be possible-I only wanted to mention it as an addition:

Why don't we try to destroy tropical cyclones by seeding them with silver iodide:
Here is why it wouldn't work:
http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/C5a.html

Why don't we try to destroy tropical cyclones by placing a substance on the ocean surface?
Here is why it wouldn't work:
http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/C5b.html

Did you think silver iodide affected hurricanes by reducing it by 30%-that wasn't silver iodide,that was natural process known as "Concentric eyewall cycles":
"Concentric eyewall cycles" are:
http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/D8.html

Why don't we try to destroy tropical cyclones by nuking them?
Here is why it wouldn't work:
http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/C5c.html

Why don't we try to destroy tropical cyclones by adding a water absorbing substance?
Here is why it wouldn't work:
http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/C5d.html

Why don't we try to destroy tropical cyclones by cooling the surface waters with icebergs or deep ocean water?
Here is why it wouldn't work:
http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/C5e.html

Why don't we try to destroy tropical cyclones by other means?
Here is why it wouldn't work:
http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/C5f.html

 

Technology isn't all-powerful.It has been shown how many times that these weather events can easily shutdown everything.
Well,EL NINO happened because of the becuase the entire Earth is getting hotter.
Just because there are colder places and cold eras-it's because there has to balance between could and hot,the balance of energies
No,they are not,and they never will.These experiments are much like genetically modified food.It could happen things for which scientists think that could never happen.The balance of energy is the key.
Everytime you try control anything,you're faced with the imbalance which must be compensated.And global warming is the fact,After all we are closer to the sun and now Earth is getting warmer,man is only speeding up this process(for his own damage,not nature's).
Alolo of these storms,tornadoes can easiy shutdown anything electromagnetic.
All you can do it is just modified but than the weather will be more extreme in order to keep the balance.