Don't forget your sunscreen!greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread |
For those who haven't heard of Ed Dames yet, he is probably the best remote viewer in the world, which basically means that his vision can transcend the illusion of time, as we perceive it, either backward or forward. This man is picking up indications that a lot of us are going to be fried by the sun before we even get the chance to find about what happens with Y2K. I'm sure a lot of you will say he is nuts, but think about it; The ozone layer is in the worst shape that it has ever been, and we are heading into a new solar maximum activity period, which will include lots of blasts of gamma radiation.Having been advised by their leading scientists that this is some serious s**t we are going into, the government is implementing defensive counter-measures to protect us from this radiation, in at least two methods which have already been observed.
One, they have installed devices within military bases near most major metropolitan areas which emit a massive electromagnetic dome field, deflecting radiation which manages to penetrate through thin spots and holes in the Earth's outer ozone layer. Over the last couple years, there have been hundreds of Nexxrad radar displays on daily weather maps clearly showing evidence of these systems being tested.
Secondly, they have also been testing atmospheric-altering chemicals by dispersion from large tanker-type aircraft. These anomalous jet contrails, or more accurately, "chem-trails", act as a catalyst in the formation of thick, low-lying cloud layers, which presumably could act as a filter against the sun's deadly radiation. This may sound like bunk to the average person who doesn't notice the subtle differences, but I have personally seen them turn a cloudless clear blue sky into overcast within minutes. I'm sure they were originally confined to barren areas, but are now being tested over populated areas in order to determine what types of health risks might occur, in anticipation of considerable use in the very near future.
The weather in the last several years has been definitely getting more and more extreme each year, illustrating the severely unstable patterns being brought on by the collapsing ozone layer, and the exponentially accelerating rate at which these conditions worsen. Each year we are setting new records for total expenditures required to repair the mayhem from massive weather destruction.
With respect to the Y2K issue, I think this adds a whole new perspective. Not even Ed Dames can predict the exact time frame in which these phenomena will become horrifyingly destructive, but he senses that it is very near, and will in fact probably preclude any major Y2K disasters. The threat of losing control over our information systems pales in comparison to what Mother Nature may soon send our way, in appreciation of the way we have irresponsibly ignored her delicate balance. Also, those who hope to escape the wrath of Y2K by fleeing from urban areas might actually be better off to remain there, where they may be better sheltered from the elements. There do not seem to be any indications of adverse effects from the electromagnetic fields over the cities, although many report ailments from the chem-trails, more likely to be dispersed over the rural areas. So take your pick, but wherever you go, don't forget your sunscreen!
-- @ (@@@.@), May 07, 1999
Here's those links:e. m. dome shields
-- @ (@@@.@), May 07, 1999.
Ed Dames and all of his "remote viewer" ilk are all frauds and scam artists.If he could truly do what he says, he would be a millionaire by taking up James Randi's ESP challenge.
He didn't, because he can't.
Jolly hates frauds.
-- Jollyprez (jolly@prez.com), May 07, 1999.
There is a big difference between remote viewing and ESP. Ed Dames is not going to waste his time challenging someone to a spoon-bending contest.
-- @ (@@@.@), May 07, 1999.
@,If I were E.D. I wouldn't waste my time with spoon bending either,,, I'd be a Multi-Millionaire,,,is ed?,,, is he highly invested in sun screen?,, ready to make that killing?,,, when is the comet due?
-- CT (ct@no.yr), May 07, 1999.
Ps,,,, contrails,,,BRAHAHAHAHA,,,OH,,,pleeezze!!!Are you some city boy that never looked up till someone said " look,, they are gasing us "?,,,ROTFLMAO,,, Do you see concentration camps w/ gas chambers and rail-yards? Is George Bush really a Grey shape-changer?,,, I gotta stop, My ribs are hurting,
Got duct tape?
-- CT (ct@no.yr), May 07, 1999.
Oh, Please!Come on guys! We don't need this! Take it to some other site. I refer you to http://www/junkscience.com for a reasonable resource for this type of nonsense. Things are bad enough already without this kind of silliness. CSICOP is another good source if you want a reality check. For what it's worth, I'm a 6.5-7 on the y2k scale, a high-end modeling/simulation research scientist, and I take the y2k problem VERY seriously. This sort of garbage is just fringe noise.
A Card-Carrying Skeptic,
Spindoc'
-- Spindoctor (spindoc_99_2000@yahoo.com), May 07, 1999.
Oh come on Spin Doc,,, these guys are fun,, we all know why they are here.1. Paid
2. Clueless.
3 Hopeing for TEOTWAWKI.
-- CT (ct@no.yr), May 07, 1999.
@,>a new solar maximum activity period, which will include lots of blasts of gamma radiation
Actually, most of the energy in the blasts from solar storms is in charged particles -- protons, electrons, ions -- rather than gamma radiation.
BTW, the ozone layer is mostly effective against ultraviolet radiation, not gamma radiation.
>One, they have installed devices within military bases near most major metropolitan areas which emit a massive electromagnetic dome field, deflecting radiation which manages to penetrate through thin spots and holes in the Earth's outer ozone layer.
Uh ... no. The rest of the atmosphere just naturally does a nice job of absorbing almost all the radiation not absorbed by the ozone layer, without any augmenting by a "massive electromagnetic dome field". And if you actually do a calculation of the power requirement for such a "dome field", you'll have another mystery to explain -- where the power for the generating equipment comes from.
>These anomalous jet contrails, or more accurately, "chem-trails", act as a catalyst in the formation of thick, low-lying cloud layers, which presumably could act as a filter against the sun's deadly radiation.
That presumption is wrong, because it is the upper atmosphere that absorbs the potentially-damaging energetic radiation before it gets to the lower atmosphere where the clouds reside.
>wherever you go, don't forget your sunscreen!
Finally, a bit of sensible advice.
-- No Spam Please (No_Spam_Please@anon_ymous.com), May 07, 1999.
All those that mock spoon bending........Let it be known that, as a person who holds a Doctorate from the 'Yuri Geller Institute of Advanced Spoon Bending',I take this science seriously. You may bend spoons, but can you bend them right? Are you one with the spoon? Can you feel the spoon and appreciate its uniqueness? Is it bending only due to your will, or have you persuaded the spoon to bend out of love?
Hard questions...only a third level initiate in the higher echelons of this cornucopia can fully grasp..........
..Bend the spoon, or do not bend.....there is no try.....'Spoony One Kenobi'....
-- Craig (craig@ccinet.ab.ca), May 07, 1999.
Did anyone else hear about some of the sunscreens providing little protection, and some were even downright harmful. This was on TV but I don't remember where or the details other than it was on network news. I wonder which screen is best? Any suggestions?
-- gale (guide@earthling.net), May 07, 1999.
Ed Dames is full of shit; he's a disinformational spook, hired to tell 13.3% truth and spike it with lies to confuse people about matters which cannot be reliably concealed. He IS a multimillionaire - if that's your standard of a reliable source of truth(?). The foregoing in no way proves that A) remote viewing doesn't work, or B) The government isn't cloud-seeding like it was going out of style, and for some as yet unknown purpose, or C) We aren't in SERIOUS trouble with the ozone layer, UV exposure, and solar flares (don't they teach logic in the schools anymore?).There's some interesting info about CISCOP (shadow-funded reality police) and how and why they operate, in this book (it's a great read, btw):
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1561840025/qid=926106548/sr=1-2 /002-2787705-4335439
For the more philosophically inclined, who are ready to enter the post-mechanist 21st century milieu, I heartily recommend:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0860916464/qid=926107303/sr=1-1 /002-2787705-4335439
Blind "skepticism" is as ignorant as blind "faith." Don't shut in your mind; neither give away or discard your mind. Liberate your mind and body. Open your eye.
Dano
-- Dano (bookem@blacksand.srf), May 07, 1999.
From back in 1997: Swamp Gas JournalEd Dames, one such expert scientific remote viewer, said that the object [Comet Hale-Bopp] contained a large quantity of a pathogen which will reach Earth and destroy all terrestrial vegetation in 1997.
Well, Dames was close. Sadly, Hale-Bopp contained just enough weirdness to convince some folks in Rancho Santa Fe to commit suicide...
-- Mac (sneak@lurk.hid), May 07, 1999.
No Spam,I am not a physicist (are you?), so I'm not going to try to differentiate between gamma radiation and ultraviolet or infrared, but the point is that a magnetic field DOES deflect some of what the sun is throwing at us. If it weren't for the Earth's primary magnetic field above our atmosphere, we wouldn't even have an atmosphere and all life would be vaporized. And it doesn't take a genius to know that a thick cloud layer could provide substantial protection from the sun, keeping the temperature levels down. Without this as a possible defensive option, temperatures would soar, crops would not be able to grow, and oceans would boil. It would be suicidal if we weren't exploring these options for our protection. Can you offer any explanation for these events?
-- @ (@@@.@), May 07, 1999.
Mac,I do not believe that statement implies that all of the vegation would be gone during 1997, but rather the comet would come in 1997 (which it did) leaving pathogens behind which would eventually destroy vegetation. We have recently been seeing an awful lot of new pathogens appearing, origin not exactly clear, and there is evidence of some vegetative destruction and an awful lot of people getting sick in ways we have never before seen. I think it is very likely that Dames was correct on that one and that the comet did leave some residue behind.
-- @ (@@@.@), May 07, 1999.
Dano,Your wrote: "Blind "skepticism" is as ignorant as blind "faith."
Wrong. Skepticism is simply the reluctance to take someone's word that a claim is true without data or reason to support it. The burden of proof is always the responsibility of the one making the claim, not the one asking for some sort of proof that the claim is true.
A closed mind is one who accepts the word of "authority" as true; one who refused to examine the data for him/herself; or one who has already decided that a claim fits/doesn't fit ones' mindset/worldview.
Skepticism is the OPPOSITE of blind faith.
Simple question: where is your data? I'm not from Missouri, but please show me anyway. If you cannot, I will remain
A Card Carrying Skeptic,
Spindoc'
-- Spindoctor (spindoc_99_2000@yahoo.com), May 07, 1999.
@,>a physicist (are you?)
My college minor. Astronomy's been a long-time hobby.
>a magnetic field DOES deflect some of what the sun is throwing at us.
Yes, it does deflect some - the charged particles. Earth's magnetic field diverts them along the lines of magnetic force, which meet the atmosphere near the north and south magnetic poles. When the charged particles collide with upper atmosphere atoms and molecules there, the result is the beautiful aurora.
However, a magnetic field (at the strengths we're talking about, anyway) has no effect on gamma, ultraviolet, or infrared radiation. Doesn't Ed Dames know this?
>And it doesn't take a genius to know that a thick cloud layer could provide substantial protection from the sun, keeping the temperature levels down.
Yes, clouds are quite effective at reflecting infrared (heat) radiation -- both incoming (lower temperature on a cloudy day than a clear day -- especially summer) and outgoing (higher temperature on a cloudy night than a clear night -- especially winter).
They block most of the ultraviolet, but practically none of the gamma radiation. Fortunately, our sun emits relatively little gamma radiation compared to the other types.
>Without this as a possible defensive option, temperatures would soar, crops would not be able to grow, and oceans would boil.
You mean, if Earth didn't have an atmosphere? In that case, temperatures on Earth would fluctuate through almost the same wide range as they do now on our Moon (below -200 F at night, above +200 F during daytime). The average overall temperature would drop a bit, but that wouldn't make as much difference to would-be inhabitants as the extreme daily range.
If you mean a situation of atmosphere without clouds -- well ... clouds are automatic as long as there is significant water.
If you mean no magnetic field: Over the long term, Earth would lose atmosphere a little faster than it does now, but would probably stabilize at a moderately lower amount than now, with correspondingly larger daily temperature swings.
>It would be suicidal if we weren't exploring these options for our protection.
But the "electromagnetic dome field" idea simply isn't realistic because (a) the energy required to generate something that would be effective is VASTLY beyond human capability in the foreseeable future, and (b) there are more-effective (and energy-efficient) ways of accomplishing the sorts of protection you're writing about than some "electromagnetic dome field".
>Can you offer any explanation for these events?
Which events? The oceans aren't boiling (unless you're talking about everyday, ordinary evaporation).
-- No Spam Please (No_Spam_Please@anon_ymous.com), May 08, 1999.
@,Oh, by "events" do you mean the stuff on the "FLASH RADAR RESEARCH" page?
The 1st & 3rd images, "NEXRAD MOSAIC COMPOSITE REFLECTIVITY": (A) "Reflectivity" of what? (B) What sort of instrument produced the data for these plots?
2nd image: What is a "SEQ. MONTANA MOON STORM" supposed to be?
-- No Spam Please (No_Spam_Please@anon_ymous.com), May 08, 1999.
You know I thought that there was enough "real stuff" chaos, fractals, quantum physics, cosmology, relitivity, DNA, evolution and to top it off your own mind that one would ever bother to worry about something you can do nothing in life about even if the event was to happen in our lives.WOW// In the 5 billion years that the earth has been around it has seen its fair share of troubles. If the sun flares and scorches the earth it will heal. Do you really feel that the sun is going to pick Y2K to start scorching us?
If you are REALLY going to get in to this topic try Worlds in Collision. Its been 25 yrs since I read it but he paints an interesting historical picture as it were. A must read for biblical historical buffs. He is HEAVY into the research. Not a topic I would choose but hey there are differant types in this world. The link and below a review, I did not right it and make no judgement other than what I wrote above.
Y2K and the earth will still rotate. **VBG**
Amazon.com: A Glance: Worlds in Collision
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0385045417/qid=926156588/sr= 1-7/002-8234744-4194416
Customer Comments
& nbsp; & nbsp; Average Customer Review: Number of Reviews:
& nbsp; & nbsp; 23& nbsp; & nbsp; gmorrison@claimsrisk.com from Atlanta , April 8,
& nbsp; & nbsp; 1999
& nbsp; & nbsp; Catastrophe Happens!
& nbsp; & nbsp; This book is worth the effort. Whether a scholar, or a person with
& nbsp; & nbsp; a healthy curiosity, this book should stimulate your brain cells.
& nbsp; & nbsp; The book does not roll along like a Tom Clancy novel, but it does
& nbsp; & nbsp; describe more chaos and destruction than all his novels combined.
& nbsp; & nbsp; We're talking "a disaster of Biblical proportions, Old Testament,
& nbsp; & nbsp; Mr. Mayor, real wrath of God type stuff, fire and brimstone
& nbsp; & nbsp; coming down from the skies, rivers and seas boiling, 40 years of
& nbsp; & nbsp; darkness, earthquakes, volcanoes, . . . dogs & cats living
& nbsp; & nbsp; together, mass hysteria" ("Ghostbusters I" but right on target).& nbsp; & nbsp; Reading this book gives the open minded reader the opportunity to
& nbsp; & nbsp; view the history of the Earth in a completely new way, and some
& nbsp; & nbsp; of our favorite mysteries of the past may be decoded in conjunction
& nbsp; & nbsp; with Velikovsky's "theories". The scientific discoveries of the 49
& nbsp; & nbsp; years since the book was first published have been very kind to
& nbsp; & nbsp; Dr. Velikovsky, but not so kind to scientific dogma of the same
& nbsp; & nbsp; period).& nbsp; & nbsp; Velikovsky dares to read ancient works literally, and to look for
& nbsp; & nbsp; proof of their accuracy, even when they appear flawed. If a
& nbsp; & nbsp; document states that the sun rose in the west, Velikovsky is willing
& nbsp; & nbsp; to search for proof that it did, instead of presuming the text is
& nbsp; & nbsp; flawed. Velikovsky's ideas help to unravel mysteries which cannot
& nbsp; & nbsp; be decoded until we are willing to challenge the scientific dogma
& nbsp; & nbsp; which presumes that ancient documents are incorrect whenever
& nbsp; & nbsp; they disagree with our perceptions of what they ought to say.& nbsp; & nbsp; Will Stonehenge be forever a mystery, because theories that it was
& nbsp; & nbsp; built as an astrological computer are dashed by the fact that present
& nbsp; & nbsp; planetary orbits do not fit its alignment? Or can we suppose that
& nbsp; & nbsp; prehistoric man dragged those stones around, and reset them
& nbsp; & nbsp; several times, because keeping up with the wanderings of
& nbsp; & nbsp; comets/planets was important to their survival. Is it possible that
& nbsp; & nbsp; today Stonehenge does not align because the orbits of stars and
& nbsp; & nbsp; planets, relative to the Earth's, have changed?& nbsp; & nbsp; If the errosion on the Sphinx is a result of water, not wind and
& nbsp; & nbsp; sand, could this relate to a drastic shift in the Earth's axis since it
& nbsp; & nbsp; was built? Could such a shift have caused the sudden decline of
& nbsp; & nbsp; Egyptian culture?& nbsp; & nbsp; And have we ever wondered what those Mammoths ate out there
& nbsp; & nbsp; on the Siberian tundra? Did they live on lichen and snowcones, or
& nbsp; & nbsp; did they eat a few tons of subtropical plants each day (as supported
& nbsp; & nbsp; by the stomach contents found in those flash frozen Mammoths
& nbsp; & nbsp; found in Siberia in the sixties). And HOW did they get flash frozen
& nbsp; & nbsp; so quickly that the meat never spoiled?& nbsp; & nbsp; I first read this book in the seventies, while in college. A
& nbsp; & nbsp; theologian at the time suggested I should not read the book, as he
& nbsp; & nbsp; felt Velikovsky was trying to show that God did not cause the
& nbsp; & nbsp; events recorded in the Bible which so often helped the Jews. I am
& nbsp; & nbsp; sure Dr. Velikovsky would not try to prove a negative hypothesis,
& nbsp; & nbsp; and I found no evidence of same in the book.& nbsp; & nbsp; It is interesting that all other cultures perceived the comets to be
& nbsp; & nbsp; gods, while the Jews saw the comets as messengers of the one
& nbsp; & nbsp; God. It is curious that these cataclysms only seemed to help the
& nbsp; & nbsp; Jews.& nbsp; & nbsp; The book supports the historical accuracy of the Bible, as well as
& nbsp; & nbsp; other religious writings and "mythologies". This book in worth the
& nbsp; & nbsp; effort, as it has a lot to contribute to our own perceptions of nature,
& nbsp; & nbsp; history, and religion.
-- Brian (imager@home.com), May 08, 1999.
Last time I copy source code from Amazon
-- Brian (imager@ampsc.com), May 08, 1999.
Spindoctor:Read the books I posted.
You can take your archaic demarcation criteria for "science" and insert them into your 19th century reality-tunnel. My results are not reproducable in a sterile environment, but they serve me well, Horatio. Enjoy the comfort of consensus.
Dano
-- Dano (bookem@blacksand.srf), May 08, 1999.
Everyone,Here's an interesting collection of contrail info:
http://www.cbjd.net/orbit/graphics/chemaircraft.html
Enjoy,
Dano
-- Dano (bookem@blacksand.srf), May 08, 1999.
I discovered a very good site which reveals some of what the Air Force is working on which could explain the dome images seen on weather maps.Although it seems they are exploring weather modification and communication applications, I think the most likely reason that they are getting these things on line is for detecting incoming targets.
Here is a clip from their site:
"AIM based radar could be operated at a frequency chosen to optimize target detection, rather than be limited by prevailing ionospheric conditions. This, combined with the possibility of controlling the radar's wave polarization to mitigate clutter effects, could result in reliable detection of cruise missiles and other low observable targets."
Main site contents
-- @ (@@@.@), May 08, 1999.
No Spam, That isn't my web site, so I'm not exactly sure what you're seeing on the Nexrad. I can confirm that it isn't a hoax though, because I usually check the daily radar at Yahoo and have seen these patterns in several occasions when they are turned on. One time I saw a very huge and clear circle right over the middle of Arkansas. Today there isn't much although if you look close it seems like they may have the systems activated over Portland and Seattle, where you can make out circular reflectivity of the precipitation. Yahoo Northwest Radar
It seems that it has to be just the right atmospheric conditions or precipitation in order to see them best, but if you check everyday I'm sure you'll see some good ones within a week or two. My guess (not being a physicist!) is that these devices are ionizing or interacting with the atmosphere or moisture in a manner which makes them more visible to the radar. Yahoo weather maps The "Radar Animation" maps are best for spotting them
-- @ (@@@.@), May 08, 1999.
No Spam,Regarding your remark with respect to the power required to do this, I found this comment from the research:
"An AIM could theoretically reflect radio waves with frequencies up to 2 GHz, which is nearly two orders of magnitude higher than those waves reflected by the natural ionosphere. The MW radiator power requirements for such a system are roughly an order of magnitude greater than 1992 state-of-the-art systems; however, by 2025 such a power capability is expected to be easily achievable."
It has become obvious that within the last year or two, they have found a way to meet these power requirements, way ahead of schedule.
-- @ (@@@.@), May 08, 1999.
@,>That isn't my web site, so I'm not exactly sure what you're seeing on the Nexrad.
Hunh? _You're_ the one who provided a link to it (e. m. dome shields) at the top of the Answers portion of this thread. Didn't you look at what's there?
However, now I understand that they are just weather radar images. That leads to two simple explanations for the ring-like structures in them.
(A) Weather radar almost always scans a circular pattern around it, and radar located in or near urban areas often has the "ground clutter" echoes from buildings subtracted out of each image. So whenever the reflections from the surrounding atmosphere are roughly uniform in all directions (i.e., uniform cloud banks surrounding the radar), the image will look like a ring. The center of the ring is dark (less reflection) because that's where most ground clutter reflections are being subtracted.
(B) Weather patterns naturally include lots of cyclone and anti-cyclone (low- and high-pressure areas) areas in which the precipitation tends to be organized in a roughly circular or spiral pattern. When such a pattern is centered on the location of a weather radar, the ring-shaped reflectivity pattern described in (A) will reinforce the circularity of appearance.
No mystery. No artificial ionospheric mirrors needed to explain the images.
>It seems that it has to be just the right atmospheric conditions or precipitation in order to see them best
Of course. They're natural weather patterns.
>Regarding your remark with respect to the power required to do this, I found this comment from the research: >"An AIM could theoretically reflect radio waves with frequencies up to 2 GHz, < snip > by 2025 such a power capability is expected to be easily achievable."
The various frequencies of radiation are not interchangeable. High frequencies, such as gamma radiation, carry enough energy per photon to cause extensive damage to human tissue even in small numbers. Low frequencies, such as radio waves (radar), carry much much less energy per photon and do not pose a danger to human tissue unless there are a very large number of them per second (as there are inside a microwave oven, or right next to a radio or TV broadcast antenna).
The AIM scheme described at the AIM cruise missile detection site is designed to make small changes to portions of the atmosphere in order to enhance the reflection of low-energy RF radiation, not high-energy radiation such as gamma rays, protons, or ions. It could NOT possibly make any noticeable difference in temperatures on the ground. It is NOT designed for "deflecting radiation which manages to penetrate through thin spots and holes in the Earth's outer ozone layer". It can NOT protect people on the ground from gamma rays or other high-energy radiation, or even from the ultraviolet radiation that causes sunburn.
-- No Spam Please (No_Spam_Please@anon_ymous.com), May 09, 1999.
Uh, Meerkat, wouldn't this better be served on the alt.astronomy/physics/metereology boards?
-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), May 09, 1999.