The Birth of HAARP

This article is part of the series: The Radiation Database: HAARP Research HQ

HAARP can do the following:

TETHER Panel Recommendation - Use HAARP facility in Alaska as a “wind tunnel” to determine the feasibility and engineering specifications of a mitigation system

Satellite Threat Due to High Altitude Nuclear Detonation – Eisenhower Institute – Papadopoulos-Presentation 280369

The HAARP Freedom of Information Act Request DISCLOSURE

This document, once classified, came as a result of a Freedom of Information Act request by the Above Top Secret forum. There is a watermark in the background with a copyright usage link, which has now been removed. To my knowledge, this is the only version of this file currently available on the internet. The importance of this document cannot be overstated.

Download this on Scribd: HAARP Research and Applications – Above Top Secret FOIA

Continue reading

Stanford Star Labs’ HAARP website

This article is part of the series: The Radiation Database: HAARP Research HQ

Please read THE BIRTH OF HAARP before proceeding


Originally revived by Dutchsinse here

HAARP PROJECT

        Characterization of  the Modified and Ambient Lower Ionosphere for HAARP using VLF diagnostics :

         It is well documented that localized conductivity perturbations in the D region cause scattering of VLF waves propagating in the earth-ionosphere waveguide. These disturbances are generally caused by localized changes in electron density or temperature.

VLF signals scattered from these disturbed regions add to the direct signal from distant transmitters to cause amplitude and phase changes in the total received signal.

Experiments by Jones et al., Dowden et al., Barr et al., and Bell et al. indicate that ionospheric disturbances produced by powerful HF heaters can generate readily measurable changes in the amplitude and the phase of subionospheric VLF signals propagating near the heater. Several different HF heating facilities located at Platteville, Colorado, at Ramfjordmoen, in Norway, and the HAARP facility in Gakona, Alaska have been used in the past to study this effect.

Since the VLF amplitude and phase perturbations are produced by D-region perturbations, a set of amplitude and phase measurements can be used to characterize the perturbed D-region.

Below are some results from Bell et al., experiment from the 1992 HIPAS campaign. This experiment uses the VLF amplitude and phase measured at Fort Yukon, Alaska, transmitted at 23.4 kHz from NPM, Hawaii. The HIPAS heater creates a disturbed region close to the great circle path between NLK and FY.

Figure 1 shows VLF data recorded on 30th of September 1992. The HIPAS heater is turned on for 100 milliseconds and turned off for the next 400 milliseconds. This cycle with a period of half a second is recorded for 28 minutes. The superposed epoch analysis shown in the middle panel is obtained by dividing the data in the upper panel into 500 millisecond segments that are subsequently summed and averaged. Thus we get a single 500 ms result. The first 100 milliseconds consists of the superposition of the direct signal and the scattered signal from heated ionosphere over the HIPAS HF heater, while the next 400 milliseconds is the direct VLF signal from NPM. There is a clear amplitude increase of about .18 dB due to the scattered signal. The spectral analysis also clearly shows the peaks at 2Hz and its harmonics.
Click for a larger image
Click for a lager image
                    FIGURE 1                                                         FIGURE 2

Figure 2 shows a similar analysis  done for the phase of the VLF signal and we can see that there is a phase difference of -4.5 degrees. This phase difference is again due to the scattered signal from the heated region.

The aim of the HAARP project is to characterize the Modified and Ambient Lower Ionosphere for HAARP using VLF diagnostics. The basis of the VLF diagnostic depends on the described amplitude and phase changes in the VLF signal.

For this purpose, 3 VLF signals will be used transmitted at three different frequencies. NAA transmits at 24.0 kHz from  44:65 N 67:28 W. The signal will be received at Wasilla (61:34 N, 149:27 W). NLK  (48:20 N 121:91W) transmits at 24.8 kHz. The signal is received at Healy (63:48 N , 149 W). NPM (21:41 N,  158:15 W) signal transmitted at 23.4 kHz is received at Delta Jcn (64:03 N, 145.42 W). The receiving sites are chosen such that the propagation path of the VLF signal passes through the heated region by the HAARP system which is simply shown by the red circle in the following figures.


Click for a larger image

Click for a larger image

                                FIGURE 3                             FIGURE 4

The 6 measurements (3 amplitude and 3 phase) of VLF signal is used to diagnose the modified temperature profile. The following diagram explaind the method implemented in the inversion of VLF data.


Click for a larger image

FIGURE 5

Here is an example of superposed epoch analysis showing the NLK VLF transmitter signal being modified by the HAARP transmitter. During the 15 minutes of modulation, there is clearly a 25 Hz signal superimposed on top of the received amplitude. The same analysis is applied to the following 15 minutes, when the modulation was off.


FIGURE 6

During the  HAARP campaign during 8 March 1999-28 March 1999 VLF signals will be continuously recorded at the sites and some more results will be posted in this WWW page.

The stations used in this campaign are listed below :

HAARP Station #1 : Healy

HAARP Station #2 : Wasilla

HAARP Station #3 : Delta Junction

————–

http://web.archive.org/web/20020805114716/http://www.haarp.alaska.edu/haarp/compare.html


The HAARP IRI is a high power transmitter operating in the High Frequency (HF) portion of the electromagnetic spectrum. Many other high power installations operate in this band including other ionospheric research facilities and international broadcast stations. The following chart compares a few other such facilities with the HAARP IRI at various phases of its construction up to the final completed facility, the FIRI. Also see the chart of currently operating ionospheric interaction facilities showing their performance compared on a frequency basis.

Comparison

The full name of each of these facilities is:

  • Arecibo (National Astronomy and Ionosphere Center, Puerto Rico)
  • HAARP DP (Developmental Prototype)
  • HAARP Current Facility
  • HAARP Final Facility
  • HIPAS High Power Auroral Stimulation Observatory
  • HISCAT (International Radio Observatory, Sweden)
  • SURA (Radiophysical Research Institute, Nizhny Novgorod, Russia)
  • Tromsoe (EISCAT facility, Norway)
  • VOA (Voice of America – Delano, CA)

——————

http://web.archive.org/web/20020815175934/http://www.haarp.alaska.edu/haarp/ant3.html

The simplest antenna systems consist of a single antenna element, often in the form of a dipole or a loop. These simple antenna types generally have a broad radiation pattern such that radio signals are transmitted (or received) over a very large number of directions. This broad coverage may be desirable for some applications. Cellular telephones, for example, must be able to send and receive the conversation toward the nearest cellular tower no matter where the user may be located and without the user having to point the handset. As a result, the antenna used in this application (a form of dipole) has a very broad area of coverage.

For other applications, it may be possible to determine where the radio signal should be transmitted. For example, antennas used on commercial and DoD satellite systems are designed to transmit (and to receive) their radio signals toward the surface the Earth since that is where the users are. These satellites, often located at geostationary altitudes, use antennas with fairly narrow radiation patterns to maximize the power reaching the Earth and to minimize the power that is wasted by being transmitted in other directions.

The HF antenna system to be used for Active Ionospheric Research at the HAARP site will assist other facility instruments in the study the overhead ionosphere. As a result, it too has been designed to optimize or restrict the transmission pattern to lie within a narrow overhead region. To achieve this desirable antenna pattern, the HAARP system uses an “array” of individual antenna elements. The HAARP antenna array is similar or identical to many other types of directive antenna types in use for both military and civilian applications including air traffic control radar systems, long range surveillance systems, steerable communication systems and navigation systems.

Array Basics

Whenever two or more simple antenna structures (such as the individual dipoles used at HAARP) are brought together and driven from a source of power (a transmitter) at the same frequency, the resulting antenna pattern becomes more complex due to interference between the signals transmitted separately from each of the individual elements. At some points, this interference may be constructive causing the transmitted signal to be increased. At other points, the interference may be destructive causing a decrease or even a cancellation of transmitted energy in that direction.

Two element patternFigure 1. An array of two dipole antennas. In Figure 1 to the left, two dipole antennas are placed close to each other and excited with a transmitter. The transmitter’s power is split evenly between the two elements so that the excitations applied to each dipole are equal in amplitude and in phase. The resulting antenna pattern is narrower or sharper in the broadside direction than it would have been for either dipole alone. Moreover, the strength of the transmitted signal in the broadside direction (T1 in the figure), is stronger than the transmitted signal would have been for one dipole antenna with the same total transmitter power. The ratio of the strength of the signal at the pattern maximum (i.e. at T1) to the signal for a single antenna element is called the pattern gain. Pattern gain is accomplished at the expense of power transmitted in other directions. The strength of the signal off-broadside (T2 in the figure) would be weaker for the case of two dipoles (as shown) than it would have been for a single dipole.

The purpose of an antenna array is to achieve directivity, the ability to send the transmitted signal in a preferred direction. If a large number of array elements can be used, it is possible to greatly enhance the strength of the signal transmitted in a given direction while suppressing or even eliminating the signal transmitted in other directions.

Four element patternFigure 2. An array of four dipole antennas. The pattern is sharper and sidelobes may be present. By adding additional antenna elements, the pattern can be further narrowed. Figure 2, to the left, shows four dipole antennas placed near each other and excited from a single transmitter whose power has been equally split four ways such that the signals arriving at the dipoles are all of equal magnitude and all of the same phase. The pattern in this case is narrower than the previous example for two dipoles. Additionally, the strength of the signal in the broadside direction is stronger than the strength of the signal in the two dipole case (T3 > T1). Again this is accomplished by the removal of power that had been radiated in unwanted directions into the main, broadside direction or main lobe.Figure 2 also shows the appearance of lower level maxima or sidelobes in the total antenna pattern. Sidelobes are a characteristic feature of most complex antenna arrays. Sidelobes are generally undesirable characteristics of an antenna system and numerous techniques have been developed over the years to suppress them.

It is theoretically possible to suppress sidelobes completely in an array of antenna elements if the excitation of each element is controllable. The process of shaping the antenna pattern so as to eliminate sidelobes is called tapering. Eliminating sidelobes results in less total gain at the pattern maximum, however, and it yields a broader main lobe.

Phased element patternFigure 3. An array of four dipoles in which the individual elements are driven at a predetermined relative phase. While the shape of the antenna pattern can be tailored by careful choice of the amplitude of the individual element excitations, the angle at which the pattern maximum occurs can be changed by adjusting the phase of the excitations of each of the antenna elements. If the elements are all driven in-phase, the pattern maximum will occur broadside to the array. If the phases of the excitations to each element are chosen correctly, however, the peak of the main lobe can be shifted (or steered) to a new angle relative to broadside. In general, the maximum signal strength at the new pointing angle (T4 in Figure 3 to the left) is close to but less than the broadside case.When the pattern is steered to a new direction, the shape and direction of any sidelobes that may have originally been present changes. If the pattern is steered too far relative to the element spacing, a new lobe (called a grating lobe) will appear with a peak in its pattern nearly equal to the main lobe. The point where this occurs is the maximum useful steering angle.

The gain and narrow pattern shape obtained in an array of antenna elements can be equivalently obtained using a properly shaped reflector such as a parabolic dish. Such high gain antennas are commonly used for satellite reception by commercial enterprises and are frequently seen in suburban neighborhoods. (Dishes can actually produce much sharper patterns than can be achieved with practical sized phased arrays.) However, parabolic dishes are pointed using mechanical gears and motors and are not agile. A phased array can be re-pointed quite rapidly, dependent only on the speed with which the phases of the exciting signals at the terminals of the individual elements can be readjusted.

The examples shown above are all for arrays in which the elements are arranged in only one dimension. Such arrays are called linear arrays. It is also possible to construct antenna arrays in two dimensions (the HAARP antenna array is built in this manner). Such arrays are called planar arrays. Finally, arrays have been constructed in three dimensions and these are called volumetric arrays. Arrays in this class are sometimes used for underwater acoustic applications in which the individual array elements are acoustic transducers.

The amount of gain that is obtainable in an antenna array (remember, gain refers to the highest signal strength at the pattern maximum) is directly related to the narrowness of the antenna pattern. A narrow pattern implies a high antenna gain. A satellite dish antenna has a very high gain and a narrow antenna pattern. Manually pointing a consumer satellite dish antenna is a time consuming process since the peak of the antenna beam must be precisely positioned to point directly at the desired satellite.

HAARP Pattern The HAARP antenna array has a gain and a pattern shape that is a function of the frequency used. For the final, 180 element array, consisting of 15 columns by 12 rows of elements, the array gain will range from 100 (or 20 dB) at an operating frequency of 3 MHz to 1000 (or 30 dB) at the highest frequency, 10 MHz. The narrowest possible pattern width of 5 degrees will occur at the highest operating frequency, 10 MHz, as shown in Figure 4 to the left.

Because each of the elements in the array can be excited independently in amplitude, the array pattern can be shaped so as to reduce or eliminate extraneous and unwanted sidelobes. Also, the transmitter signal applied to the individual elements can be adjusted independently in phase, allowing great flexibility pointing the peak of the antenna pattern. To avoid grating lobes, the main lobe can only be be pointed to angles within 30 degrees of directly overhead.


Also see the HAARP Antenna Performance Parameters page for additional information.

—————

HAARP08

haarp alaska multiple stations

from NPM (21.4 kHz) in Hawaii
Fig. 7. Distribution of VLF signal paths which will be monitored with the proposed array of
ELF/VLF observing sites.
To avoid clutter, signal paths are shown for only two VLF transmitters,
namely the NPM transmitter in Hawaii and the NLK transmitter in Jim Creek, Washington.
The observing sites labeled in green (Talkeetna, Healy, and Dot Lake) are already in-place and
operating as part of a D-region diagnostic system for HAARP.
haarp alaska multiple stationsa
haarp alaska multiple stationsa1

HAARP makes Earthquakes?

This article is part of the series: The Radiation Database: HAARP Research HQ

Please read THE BIRTH OF HAARP before proceeding


But don’t take my word for it…

High-power ELF radiation generated by HAARP modulated HF heating of the ionosphere can cause Earthquakes, Cyclones and localized heating

by Fran De Aquino, Maranhao State University, S.Luis/MA, Brazil [on scribd]



ClimateViewer 3D Upper Atmospheric Radar (HAARP) map
Google map link


Secretary of Defense William Cohen - Eco-Terrorism

Dive into the wild world science non-fiction!

TERRAFORMINGINC.COM/HAARP

research by Jim Lee

US Army Test Technology Symposium – Weather Modification 1997

This article is part of the series: The Radiation Database: HAARP Research HQ

Please read THE BIRTH OF HAARP before proceeding


US Army Test Technology Symposium 1997 - Weather Modificationrecovered from archive.org by rezn8d.com

haarp-iri-ionospheric-research-instrument

Test Technology Symposium ’97
“The Army After Next ­ How Will We Test?”

WEATHER MODIFICATION

Dr. Arnold Barnes
Phillips Lab/GPO
Hanscom Air Force Base, MA

Abstract

“The difficulty, cost, and risk of developing a weather control system for military applications are extremely high. However, the potential benefits for national security could be even higher. Enemy weather modification weapons are possibilities which, like it or not, may be possible and must be considered,” Spacecast 2020. This paper considers such concepts as hole boring for surveillance; the use of space mirrors for night battlefield illumination, modifying the environment, enforcement of curfews and similar civil control measures; use of carbon black to retarget precipitation; fog dissipation; and cirrus enhancement.

Source of this document: www.dtc.army.mil/tts/1997/proceed/abarnes

Continue reading

ANGELS do play this HAARP – Global Extinction-Level Event or Geoengineering: Choose your pill

video link

HAARP Geoengineering with Alchemy, Arctic Methane Global Emergency, UK Gov tells climate alarmists to “Chill Out”
http://www.terraforminginc.com/haarp-geoengineering-with-alchemy-arctic-methane-global-emergency-uk-gov-tells-climate-alarmists-to-chill-out/

Radio and Laser Frequency and Harmonic Test Ranges for the Lucy and HAARP Experiments and their Application to Atmospheric Methane Destruction
http://rezn8d.net/2013/01/15/radio-and-laser-frequency-and-harmonic-test-ranges-for-the-lucy-and-haarp-experiments-and-their-application-to-atmospheric-methane-destruction/

What is HAARP?
http://rezn8d.com/haarp/

Ionospheric Heaters: worldwide map of radars like HAARP!
http://www.terraforminginc.com/ionospheric-heaters-worldwide-map-of-radars-like-haarp/

ClimateViewer 3D
http://climateviewer.com/

Project Lucy FIGURE7 Methane Diamond SRM geoengineering

Mind Control Capabilities

This is brought to you in part by our friends at archive.org!  Original (deleted) url:

http://www.mindcontrolgrid.com/capabilities.htm

Information for individuals conducting research into the technology and ethics of organized mind control. The latter is defined as, “covertly applied influences with the intent of producing a non-consensual response”.

Capabilities

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

The first step in formulating a coordinated response to electronic mind control is to determine what technological methods have been developed and proven in the field. This is somewhat impeded by secrecy laws involving “national security”. Apart from fringe diatribes, which contain varying levels of conjecture, there are ample references in the open literature. This obviously represents only the tip of the iceberg of a well funded multi-disciplinary program, involving both military and domestic agencies, that has been underway in several major countries since the early 1950′s. The intended outcome is left to your imagination.

Mind and Behavioral Control

The selection of links below illustrates the spectrum of popularly held views on the subject. This is followed by examples of emerging technology. For systems in current wide scale deployment, see the Applicationspage. Please be aware, this is a volatile topic and content may suddenly disappear from the web.

Directly Accessing Every Human Brain By Electromagnetic Induction … - PDF
Mind Control in the UK
Electromagnetic Radiation Weapons: As Powerful As The Atomic Bomb
Brain Waves and Alpha Rhythym – Schumann Resonance
Microwaves and Mind Control - PDF
Magnetic Neuromodulation
Free Miind Control Tutorial 
Mind Control Part 4
Is it Feasible to Manipulate the Human Brain at a Distance?
Mind Control: America’s Secret War
Microwave Mind Control – Tim Rifat
Electromagnetic Mind Control Frequencies Energy Radiation
Remote Behavioral Influence Technology Evidence - PDF
Psychotronic Mind Games
Operation Mind Control
ce399 Research Archive - Good selection of links.
Mind Control and Electromagnetic Weapons - Lots more links.
The Mind Has No Firewall

Hacking the Human Mind
Mind Control Tests Causing TV Presenters’ Brains to Melt Down? - Watch this video.
Mental Slavery – Science Page
Mind Control-The Ultimate Terror
The Radiation Database
Mind Control Information
Tom Rifat MC Articles
Electronic Mind Control
From Psychotronic Warfare to Biotronic Materials
Mass Mind Control: Psycho-Civilized Society
Science Decodes Inner Voices

Directed Energy Weapons (DEW’s)

While not originated for mind control per se, the following range of technologies represent a growing ability to target energetic influences with pin-point accuracy. Apart from the stated aim of asset destruction, the emitted energy beam, be it laser or microwave, can be easily modulated with signal patterns known to interfere with physical or psychological functions.


IR beam + HF longitudinal waves. Note Tesla coil on top of the box.

Continue reading

Global Map of HF Heaters like HAARP

More than 1.21 GIGAWATTS!


A subject of much debate, these devices are performing modern magic! This article will highlight the most powerful upper atmospheric radars on the planet.

Below you will see a shareable version of the ClimateViewer 3D map of HAARP facilities.


HAARP – High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program

haarp-iri-ionospheric-research-instrument

Continue reading

HAARP and Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds

This article is part of the series: The Radiation Database: HAARP Research HQ

Please read THE BIRTH OF HAARP before proceeding


ANGELS do play this HAARP – Global Extinction-Level Event or Geoengineering: Choose your pill


Posted on January 22, 2013

The Arctic Methane Group (AMEG) is a group of scientists/concerned citizens studying the release of methane trapped under our North Pole’s icecap.  They claim that not only is methane currently being released, it is poised to explode again as it did in the dinosaurs age:

VIDEO: THE DAY THE OCEANS BOILED

This video claims that as a result of rising CO2 levels, methane was released rapidly and boiled the oceans. AMEG claims that the explosive release of methane is once again close at hand:

There are some 1000 Gt to 1400 Gt (10^9 tonnes) of carbon contained in the methane hydrates on the East Siberian Arctic Shelf and 700 Gt of free methane is trapped under the Arctic submarine permafrost (Shakova et al. 2008, 2010).  Shakova et al. estimate that between 5% to 10% of the  subsea permafrost (methane hydrates) in that region is now punctured allowing methane to escape at a rate of about 0.5 Mt (500,000 tonnes) a year and that up to 50 Gt (10^9 tonnes) could be released abruptly at any time soon. Release of this subsea Arctic methane would  increase the worldwide atmospheric methane content about 12 times equivalent to doubling the carbon dioxide content of the atmosphere.

Arctic-Methane-anomalous-buildup-Nov-2008-Nov-2011

As a result, AMEG released their Strategic Plan:

  1. Consider practices and regulations that are having, or risk having, a heating effect on the Arctic.  A postponement of drilling in the Arctic would be sensible, because of inevitable escape of methane but also because of the risk of blowout with or without oil spill.

  2. Try to maintain or even enhance the current cooling effect from currently emitted sulphate aerosols in the troposphere at mid to high northern latitudes.  For example the regulation to ban bunker fuel for ships should be relaxed while encouraging continued use of bunker fuel where the resulting aerosol emissions might be beneficial.  Reduction of sulphate aerosol ‘pollution’ will be unpopular with many environment groups, but the priority to cool the Arctic has to be established.

  3. Establish the positive and negative net forcing from contrails, and encourage flight paths of commercial airplanes to reduce positive or increase negative net forcing.  The ban on polar flights, lifted recently, should be reintroduced.
    (Editors Note: Weather and Climate Engineering – William Cotton at the AMS )

  4. Reduce black carbon into Arctic.  Make for preparedness to fight tundra fires in Arctic and sub-Arctic.

  5. Find ways to remove black carbon from coal fired power stations, while allowing or compensating for the cooling effect that their aerosol emissions would be producing without the scrubbing out of sulphur compounds.

GEOENGINEERING ACTIONS FOR ENHANCING THE REFLECTION OF SUNLIGHT BACK INTO SPACE AND FOR INCREASING THE THERMAL ENERGY EMITTED INTO SPACE.

  1. Prepare the supply and logistics for spraying aerosol precursor in large quantities, preferably into the lower stratosphere, for deployment by next March or April (not sooner because the risk of ozone depletion).  Of course, possible negative impacts have to be considered before large scale deployment, but it is worth being fully prepared for such deployment on the assumption that this technique can be made to work effectively.
  2. Develop and test the deployment of suitably reflective particles, of such materials as TiO2, as alternative or supplement to sulphate aerosol.  Prepare for large scale deployment.   
  3. Finance the development of, and deployment capability for, marine cloud brightening, with a view to deployment on a large scale in spring 2013 – assuming that is the earliest conceivable time.  The main technical problem seems to be with the jets, so experts from major companies in the ink-jet technology field need to be brought in.  Boats and land installations need to be kitted out.
  4. Finance the development and deployment capability for cirrus cloud removal, since this is a promising technique.  Suitable chemicals need to be identified/confirmed, with stock-piling of these cloud seeding chemicals.  Aircraft need to be kitted out to spray these chemicals.
  5. Finance brainstorming sessions for geoengineering, with top scientists and engineers, such as to suggest further measures, improvements to above techniques and the development of other intervention ideas.
  6. Finance the research and trials of all promising techniques for helping to cool the Arctic, including the three geoengineering techniques above.  Update Earth System models to deal with the actualities of sea ice retreat, such that the effects of different techniques can be modelled and optimum joint deployment strategies established.

MEASURES TO REDUCE MORE SPECIFIC RISKS FROM ARCTIC WARMING:

  1. Finance the research and trials of promising techniques for dealing with methane, especially the reduction of methane from wetlands draining into the Arctic.  Use of diatoms to promote methanotrophs (and healthy conditions for fish) is one such technique.
  2. Finance the research and trials of promising techniques for dealing with surface melt of the Greenland Ice Sheet (GIS) and for reducing the speed of ice mass discharge.  The latter is accelerated by warm water at the sea termination of glaciers; therefore consideration should be given to techniques to cool this water.
  3. Consider techniques for reducing Arctic storms and their strength.  Techniques should be developed for reducing the frequency and severity of tropical storms, such as to minimise damage, especially to agriculture and low-lying conurbations.
  4. Consider techniques for un-sticking of blocked weather patterns.
  5. Consider techniques for improving surface albedo of sea, lakes, snow and ice by brightening water with bubbles, covering snow and ice with white granules or sheets to prolong albedo, draining pools on ice, forming ice on pools, depositing snow on ice (as fresh snow has a higher albedo) and on land, discouraging growth of plants with low albedo, etc.

Note that a new idea for improving surface albedo has been suggested in a paper to the AGU 2012, supported by AMEG founder member, Peter Wadhams..  His research on iceberg calving has led to ideas for reducing discharge of ice from the GIS.

A word of warning about finance of research, development and field trials: it is important that the results of such activities are independent, unbiased and free from financial interest.

Food security actions
Immediate actions to be initiated:

  1. Overall there is an immediate requirement for all major governments to establish an emergency ‘watchdog’ committee for internal and world food security issues. This committee should have direct access to the leadership of individual nations and include their UN Ambassador. The associated costs, in terms of humanitarian impacts alone, should warrant this move. When the assessed cost of the potentially associated national economic factors are weighed, there should be little disagreement regarding the necessity for establishing this ‘watchdog’ committee.
  2. The US Renewable Fuels Standard (“RFS”), a provision of the US Energy Policy Act of 2005, should be evaluated for a temporary stay. Depending entirely on the US corn harvest, this could transfer between 4 to 5 billion bushels back to the food market. That would reduce upward price pressure in the cereals markets and further assist by suppressing speculation in that area of food commodities.
  3. The European Renewable Energy Directive 2009/28/EC should similarly be reviewed and measures put in place to temporarily divert all relevant crops from the fuel to the food market.
  4. In both cases outlined in points 3 & 4 the emphasis should be on ‘temporary emergency measures’ and should only be applicable to crops that can be diverted to the food chain.
  5. A general directive should be agreed between all nations at the UN to prohibit the sale of OTC derivatives, in any nation, by any ‘seller’, that have any content relative to food commodities. This action will assist in dissuading institutional investors speculating in food commodities.
  6. If the crisis deepens point 4 should be further reinforced by prohibiting futures contracts in food commodities being sold to any entity who will not take actual delivery of the contracted goods. Great care will be necessary with this proposal as it is known that hedge funds, and investment banks, have established warehousing to control certain commodity pricing. Typical examples are the attempted 2010 cornering of the world cocoa market by a UK hedge fund and the current Goldman Sachs control of the US aluminium market.
  7. An alternative international seed bank must be created to provide seeds for subsistence farmers; ones that are devoid of the ‘terminator’ gene. In periods of high crop failure the inability to harvest seeds for the coming year has a crippling impact on subsistence farmers. Note that it is estimated 160,000 Indian farmers alone have committed suicide since 1967 due in part to this situation.

Following the launch of AMEG’s ‘Strategic Plan’ the above actions will be communicated to all world leaders and relevant parties in the form of an ‘Essential Action Plan’ to match the pending circumstances of the change in the world’s weather patterns.  For further details, see the website of the Arctic Methane Emergency Group at AMEG.me or contact AMEG Chair John Nissen at: johnnissen2003@gmail.com

UK Government Response to AMEG’s call for Geoengineering | Link

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO ENVIRONMENTAL AUDIT COMMITTEE REPORT BASED ON NON-EXISTING OBSERVATIONS, SAYS AMEG | Link

AMEG, the Arctic Methane Emergency Group, hereby formally complains to the UK government that the observations to which they refer in their statement [1] do not exist. The observations taken directly from the ice and recently from satellite, support a very simple model of sea ice behaviour – that the melting, as reflected by the volume average for particular months, is closely following an exponential trend, towards zero for September 2015.

THE END…. or is it…..

On the subject of methane, geoengineering, and the artic, I would like to add these additional findings.  There was a HUGE methane leak in the North Sea just prior to AMEG’s  proposals for geoengineering.  Also there is the ANGELS proposals, and the Lucy Project involving HAARP.

The ANGELS Proposal, Arctic Natural Gas Extraction Liquefaction & Sales, is a plan to drill under the ice and extract gas/oil.  This seems to be related to Project Lucy, which would involve three radars focusing their beams on methane clouds and turning those methane clouds into diamond dust, something formerly left to the science-fiction world of Alchemy.  Apparently the methane molecule and a diamond are very similar, and they believe with a 13.56 MHz frequency they can break methane down and turn it into diamond dust, which will reflect sunlight slowing global warming (aka SRM, or Solar Radiation Management).  Further, the director of HAARP says they can form noctilucent clouds above the HAARP IRI using three radars, and if their plan works, the heaters at HIPAS, Arecibo, EISCAT (Tromso), and Sura, Russia “could immediately attack the atmospheric methane as well.”

Radio and Laser Frequency and Harmonic Test Ranges for the Lucy and HAARP Experiments and their Application to Atmospheric Methane Destruction | Link

haarp-iri-ionospheric-research-instrument

HAARP
The main instrument at HAARP Station is the Ionospheric Research Instrument (IRI). This is a high power, high-frequency phased array radio transmitter with a set of 180 antennas, disposed in an array of 12×15 units that occupy a rectangle of about 33 acres (13 hectares). The IRI is used to temporarily energize a small portion of the ionosphere. The study of these disturbed volumes yields important information for understanding natural ionospheric processes.”

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

The main MHZ frequency range (High Frequency Band 3 – 30 MHZ) of the powerful IRI transmitter is slightly different from the 13.56 MHZ needed to break down the methane. However it is very powerful with a 5.1 Giga watt effective radial power at maximum output. The Ionospheric Research Instrument (IRI) at HAARP transmits over the range 2.8 MHZ to 10 MHZ slightly less than the 13.56 MHZ used to break down methane but as mentioned previously if the IRI transmitted a 10 MHz carrier waves modulated by a 3.56 MHz signal it will generate an Upper Side Frequency of 13.56 MHz which is the methane destruction frequency (Penguin Dictionary of Physics 2000).

Noctilucent clouds which are common in the Arctic form from water condensing around meteorite dust in the mesosphere above 50 km altitude and are becoming more and more abundant and are being seen at much lower latitudes. The increase in the methane concentration in the stratosphere and its oxidation in the mesosphere is resulting in more water at these high altitudes and an increase in the noctilucent clouds. The noctilucent clouds help reflect the suns heat back into space so if we can break down more methane with the HAARP or Lucy transmitters we should generate more clouds and thus help reverse global warming by:-

a) Getting rid of the high global warming potential methane at low altitudes and in the stratospheric global warming veil.

b) Generating sunshine reflecting noctilucent clouds in increasing amounts in the mesosphere which will reflect the suns energy back into space.

The HAARP facility has discovered what they call Polar Mesosphere Summer Echoes which are elusive phenomena which may be due to a thicker development of noctilucent clouds in the Arctic summer due to the increasing methane build up. These echoes are detected with the IRI transmitter when it is used as a radar with one 28 MHZ radar and two other VHF radars of 49 MHZ and 139 MHZ. If we could transmit 13.56 MHZ on the IRI transmitter and use the other radars and optical cameras to look for reflections from noctilucent clouds formed from the breakdown of methane in a circular zone above the HAARP transmitter we should be able to effectively test the system. There ought to be a buildup of the noctilucent clouds in the area where the HAARP transmissions are focused on the ionosphere. If it works there are 4 other similar facilities in the world (Hipas, Alaska; Arecibo, Puerto Rico, EISCAT, Norway and Sura, Russia) where they could immediately attack the atmospheric methane as well.

HAARP Contacts, 2012.

John Hechscher, Director, HAARP, Gakona, Alaska

haarp.alaska.edu

377th Airforce Base Wing Public Affairs, 2000 Wyoming Blvd SE, Suite A1, Kirkland Air Force base, NM, 87117

Project Lucy FIGURE7

Project Lucy FIGURE4

April 2012

  • The ANGELS Proposal – Arctic Natural Gas Extraction Liquefaction Sales: A Proposal for the Prevention of Arctic Methane | Link

The ANGELS Proposal FIGURE18

June 2012

  • Project Lucy: Radio Transmitter to decompose methane v2
  • Project Lucy Extended Version 4, Arctic News Blog | Link
  • GEOENGINEERING ARCTIC COSTS
    1. R&D and testing (this proposal)
    2. Political negotiations (could be covered under existing diplomacy financial budgets)
    3. Transport and installation (could be covered under existing military budgets)
    4. Energy supply (could be provided by nuclear submarines)
    5. Operational cost (could be part of military budgets)Project Lucy is part of a range of geo-engineering efforts to reduce warming in the Arctic. Other methods include:
    - Methane capture in the Arctic
    - Spraying particles in the atmosphere to reflect sunlight back into space
    - Pyrolysis of organic waste and carbon burial, to reduce atmospheric CO2 and soot The need to act on methane in the Arctic is such that, most likely, a range of methods will need to be deployed in parallel. Lucy has the potential to be very effective, as it can decompose methane while any resulting nano diamond powder could also reflect sunlight back into space.Project Lucy therefore aims to design, build and test a microwave transmission system targeting low-altitude methane clouds with the aim of breaking the first C-H bond as soon as the methane erupts into the atmosphere from the Arctic Ocean. The transmitters can be mounted on submarines, planes and after 2015 on boats and drilling rigs when the Arctic ice cap has melted (Arctic News, 2012).

CONTINUED….