If it hits America or not

From some of the posts that I have read, I'm assuming here not that they think that the hurricanes are man-made but that they are Amplified by certain secret weather manipulation projects like what HAARP supposedly does.

I personally believe that to be a little far-fetched but then again I don't know what the HAARP does because I haven't read into them.

I don't know what the HAARP does because I haven't read into them.

It is openly admitted that HAARP, which is just a large antenna array with a shit ton of power, can focus on and heat up (transfer energy to) a portion of the atmosphere. All storm are the result of hot air colliding with cold air. The bigger the difference the stronger the storm.

The amount of power in a single hurricane is greater than the total amount of electricity produced worldwide and it's not even close. How are they supposedly powering this thing?

I'm not an expert, but it's not like they're conjuring up a storm from sunny weather. The energy was already there, a storm was already brewing. All they'd have to do is to focus and enhance it. If the technology works the way they want it to work, they could simply add additional moisture by either heating up additional ocean water (probably rather energy intensive, but not impossible) or by redirecting moist air from other parts of the world to add to the storm (probably the better option).

That's just speculation, obviously, but I can see several ways in which they could affect a storm in such a way as to strengthen or weaken it, without needing to match the energy throughput of the storm itself.

Just based on the orders of magnitude involved here it's like trying to affect a freight train by pointing a hair dryer at it. Actually it's an order of magnitude more lopsided than that based. I really don't think this could make any real impact.

I don't think so. It would be more like affecting a freight train by moving the tracks. It still requires work but most of the energy required is compensated through planning and an effective workflow.

You don't have to "push" the storm if you can make it fall along a path of least resistance to where you want it to be. The idea behind HAARP (as I understand it) is that they can use radio waves that bounce between the Earth's crust and the ionosphere and send a targeted positive interference to very specific locations around the world, and can thereby produce artificial low-pressure zones wherever they want. Do that well and you can guide a storm cell like you'd guide a donkey with a carrot on a stick. That's actually not a bad metaphor either because it illustrates that it doesn't require a lot of energy at all to move a donkey unless you try to push it.

I mean there's still a tremendous amount of power in even regular pressure systems, so it's not like that's easy to do. You also have to assume meteorologists are perfectly able to predict the weather (since you need to control this thing so finely to manipulate events like this) and choose not to to maintain the illusion that we don't have control over this.

And wouldn't this be used to keep storms away from populated areas or are we assuming the U.S. government occasionally likes to cost itself billions of dollars in hurricane relief?

The U.S. government costs itself billions of dollars in a lot of things. And here's another bit of information. You're paying for it. "The government" in the sense of the people who run it aren't paying a dime. They're making money with it. From you. (I'm saying you because I'm not American, I have the same problem where I'm from, don't worry). So much for the point of motive.

It's certainly true that H.A.A.R.P uses tons of energy (I can't seem to find a source, but I remember reading an article a while ago in which they compared it to something like the monthly energy consumption of a city like Chicago for a single experiment, something like that), just because of the scale of it. But that's not any kind of impossible amount, and I don't see why it'd need to be.

It's the idea of interference. It'd be like setting up several radio towers which all sent out a static vibration (radio wave) and tuned it so that the resulting combination of signals would resonate and interfere with each other, effectively amplifying each other to several orders of magnitude greater amplitudes at specific locations.

Did you see the link I added in the previous comment? It shows the effects that are possible with targeted interference very well and shows it's really not a problem of energy but phase control. Precision is the much bigger stumbling block, but hey, we're dealing with hurricanes the size of states here, not trying to water a single tomato plant in the desert.

You also have to assume meteorologists are perfectly able to predict the weather (since you need to control this thing so finely to manipulate events like this)

I don't see any reason to assume this. they can predict the likelyhood of storms and hurricanes and all that pretty accurately weeks in advance sometimes; certainly days. And why would you have to manipulate the cell so finely? You want it to drift towards Houston from the South? Set a low-pressure node north of the storm and incrementally pull it over to Houston. Correct as you go.

and choose not to to maintain the illusion that we don't have control over this.

Well, they barely do maintain the illusion, as you can see in us discussing the ideas and concepts behind it. You can see it in satellite imagery. There are some who claim it's detectable in the clouds whenever they take on that distinctive wave-pattern, although I'm not convinced that's not a natural pattern.

It's the same kind of argument as the one that's so often applied to the idea of secrecy and conspiracy when they say "It could never remain a secret, somebody would talk!", to which I say "Yeah, no shit. They're called whistleblowers."

It's not that the information ain't there, it's that people don't want to see it.

HAARP puts out megawatts or gigawatts depending on what it's turned to. It's a lot for a single experiment but it's negligible compared to the amount of energy in storm systems or even regular pressure systems. I think we agree there, because I also agree it's not unreasonable to power something like HAARP on demand. I just don't agree it's able to be used in the way people theorize.

I would be interested in the math on how HF radio interference can actually be used to affect weather patterns. I've never seen any convincing evidence of this being done. Surely someone could look at all their publicly available activity and research and figure out how it is being done.

Did you see the link I added in the previous comment? It shows the effects that are possible with targeted interference very well and shows it's really not a problem of energy but phase control.

The one with the styrofoam? Energy is still used, and it will scale up with what you're trying to manipulate (and so will the complexity of manipulating it).

All I'm saying is that it's conceivable and theoretically possible. Your concerns and objections about power consumptions are certainly valid and reasonable, though to my mind not strong enough to discount the idea. I'm also not convinced enough that it is going on to state it as a fact, but I do have a strong suspicion it's true.

As to the acoustic levitation, that was merely meant as an illustration that a phasing matrix and interference patterns can be used to manipulate objects and particles. It's meant more as an analogy than as an explanation. For one, the effect shown in the video is produced using a widely different frequency band and is therefore very different in both energy consumption and the kind of particle that it will be able to manipulate.

My hunch is that if it's real it is simply energizing the movement of air particles in specific regions enough to cause a slight increase in local temperatures which in turn result in zone of relatively low pressure. But it seems I'm starting to repeat myself.

You may be right and it isn't feasible. I may be right (though I hope not) and it's already going on.

Although it is possible that we've been feeding storm systems overall accidentally via climate change. I think a lot of this sub doesn't believe in that though. And that's different than deliberately affecting one in particular.

HAARP is actually very interesting to read up on if you like science stuff, plus it is real. Not like some of the stuff the government seems to do in order to play tricks on us [project bluebeam].

People don't believe it to be man made from the ground up

Just an opportunistic boost in the hurricane's power caused by man fiddling with it

^ This.

This. I also believe Haarp application include steering - as in promoting or stalling one direction over another.

You know HAARP looks kinda like Tesla's earthquake machine he invented...just saying...

Is that why we aren't dropping some of those m.o.a.b.'s that are about to expire into the hurricanes?

What possible purpose would dropping bombs into a hurricane have?

Dissipate some of the increasing energy. And to expend some of the weapons used for war. A hurricane is a much better spot to use ammo that you otherwise wouldn't. Better than civilians, right?

I...I think you are severely underestimating the amount of energy required to affect a hurricane. The energy released by a cat 5 hurricane is more than our most powerful nuclear weapons by several orders of magnitude. Might as well try pissing into the wind, it'll be as effective as dropping the world's entire conventional stockpile into it.

100% this. Oh god... now I'm envisioning a hurricane carrying the fallout of nuclear weapons that were detonated into it in a terribly thought out plan for trying to stop it.

I'd watch that movie.

Starring Samuel L. Jackson, coming to a theater near you!

Denzel or bust.

Nobody said use nuclear. But I see you guys pushing your agenda. So I concede. Enjoy the thousands dead in Florida. If my brother dies down there, I'm gonna come back at each and every single one of you people. That is all

You didn't suggest specifically nuclear, but you did ask:

why we aren't dropping some of those m.o.a.b.'s that are about to expire into the hurricanes?

Grava-T responded explaining that it would have no effect; hurricanes are so powerful even nuclear weapons wouldn't have an impact. Then I took that and ran with it making a joke about how that sounds like a SyFy Original Movie in the vein of Sharknado.

I wish the best for your brother and all those affected by this and every other natural disaster. Here's hoping that Irma weakens or turns aside before hurting anyone else.

it would have no effect

In your and his opinion. You can show no proof to the contrary. But seeing as I cant have a conversation without somebody jumping in, its YOUR subreddit and WHATEVER I SAY IS INCORRECT. ALWAYS.

I am sorry to have upset you.

Just consider the orders of magnitude involved here. A hurricane is churning 100+TW of power, way more than the entire world's electricity production. A MOAB releases 46 GJ or less than half of a milisecond of the hurricane's power.

I've said it elsewhere but this is seriously like trying to stop a freight train by pointing a water gun or a hair dryer at it.

You are welcome to provide evidence of explosives actually being used to stop hurricanes.

1953 at an American Meteorological Society (AMS) meeting in a paper calling for an “all out war against twisters” based on what were then the new technologies of radar to detect possible tornadoes and guided missiles for seeding the tornado environment with condensation nuclei (dry ice or sliver iodide as used in attempts for rainmaking). The premise was that somehow (not clearly explained) the seeding could weaken the updraft that feeds a tornado or trigger cold downdrafts that would extinguish them “as a stiff breeze extinguishes a candle”.

Can't this be done at a much larger scale? (And sorry for using WaPo, I don't really like their site either)

Even if this worked (it hasn't to my knowledge and the article seems to agree), where does it say they were actually using the explosives to disrupt this? It just sounds like a different means of cloud seeding. Very different than just dropping a MOAB in and hoping for the best.

I understand the scale here. 10-15 consecutive moabs in a counterclockwise explosive pattern should theoretically void out the storm's inertia. And to that the dry ice/silver iodide nuclei, and we may have a working model. Even if this won't work and my family dies, I seem to be the only one trying to be proactive about this. I'm going on the record saying these events are nothing but FEMA cash grabs.

0-15 consecutive moabs in a counterclockwise explosive pattern should theoretically void out the storm's inertia. And to that the dry ice/silver iodide nuclei, and we may have a working model.

Source...? I don't think any of this works the way you think it does. And how much dry ice do you think you need for a storm that is 100 miles across compared to a tornado?

I seem to be the only one trying to be proactive about this

You and all the aid workers helping prepare for the incoming storm, the government officials ordering mandatory evacuations, all the disaster preparedness campaigns, people who set building codes and design stormwalls and levees to help protect against storms... there's a lot that we do to try to prepare for these events.

I do understand your frustration. I have had family and friends endangered by hurricanes before (and right now) too.

You don't need a source for a theory. And how would anyone know it doesn't work until they try it? Roughly 20 years ago alchemy (making gold from other things) was thought to be impossible. Now its just too costly to perform, but is 100% possible. I'm just saying nobody is even experimenting. They are just prepping for aftermath

No I mean a source for your specific suggestion of:

10-15 consecutive moabs in a counterclockwise explosive pattern should theoretically void out the storm's inertia.

Can you work through your calculations on this? If it were true I would be very interested in the math. Hurricanes fascinate me ever since I had a project on them in grade school. They're part of the reason I'm dreading moving down south which I will probably have to do for my job eventually.

As I came up with it, I just figure the storm would be circling clockwise and would be expended portion by portion, with each consecutive blasts. An object at rest stays at rest and an object in motion stays in motion with the same speed and in the same direction unless acted upon by an unbalanced force. This unbalancing force would be created by consecutive concussions within the giant radius of the weather pattern. Think of the plan they had set for the movie 'The Core' (I know its just a movie and isn't true yada, yada, yada)

The amount of power/energy involved matters. Obviously 15 firecrackers won't do it; not enough energy. Do you have any calculations estimating 15 MOABs have enough?

Can you estimate how much energy is needed to literally stop a hurricane's rotation in its tracks? Because based on the power involved (on the order of 100 TW) the hurricane churns through more energy than all 15 MOABs would have in a time scale measured in microseconds. Every day an average hurricane releases 5*10¹⁹ J, which is the energy of 800,000 of the bombs dropped on Hiroshima%2F(energy+in+the+hiroshima+bomb)).

Not to mention the other issues with this, like that you're not trying to stop a solid object that's rotating here; the rest of the storm dozens of miles away from the explosions will be unaffected. And the overall pressure systems that led to its formation would still exist, and... there's a lot behind a hurricane.

I still think its possible despite all that. Thanks for your interest though. At least you are more open minded than some of the others

I understand wanting it to be possible but you don't seem to have any evidence that the numbers are even close to adding up. Do you?

By my estimates we would have to drop many nuclear weapons into Irma at the same time to even notice any effect... and then we would have a hurricane carrying fallout and I don't even want to think about how that would work.

There goes that where's your evidence thing again. Guess you are one of them. Get blocked

You think asking for evidence makes someone a shill...?

Just so we are all on the same page, this is what a hurricane looks like:

https://www.nasa.gov/images/content/188467main_iss015e25044_lores.jpg

15 Moabs wont do shit to that. An object in motion stays in motion, and in this is like trying to stop an 80mph tank with a fire sparkler. It doesn't matter what pattern you try to ignite those sparklers in, it's not stopping that tank.

I choose to decline to read this response. Have a good day

Literally refusing to read evidence against your ideas... wow.

I wouldn't bother. This user appears to block everyone who disagrees with them.

I was in Orlando for Charley back in the early 2000s. And that was like a two or three. Your brotber should leave now.

It's not my brother it's HempCO719s, but yes. I agree. Fortunately no one I know is in the path of Irma, I do know someone who went to go help out with Harvey though.

Even the M.O.A.B.? What is your proof? Mine is Newtons second law of gravity.

A MOAB is tiny compared to even a small nuclear weapon. It would make absolutely no impact on a hurricane.

Anything large enough to disrupt a hurricane enough would end up doing more damage than the storm itself and inevitably have massive amounts of nuclear fallout.

Proof?

I haven't exactly seen much in the way of proof from you, so I'm not wasting my day researching this for you.

Well then why butt in like this was your conversation in the first place? I didn't respond to you, you responded to me. Its ok, you can be wrong once in a while. I'm just adding space_guy95 to 'the list'. Respond to me again and you will be blocked

Great, please add me to your list of people that have disagreed with you online.

Its not that list.

More importantly, how do you account for the hurricanes of decades ago before HAARP and chemtrails?

If it is talked about non-stop, before during and after the storm in the media, has legislation and regulations passed in it's name, and slogans that people put on bumper stickers (like Hurricane Sandy)... it's time to start getting suspicious.

Or whenever you hear things like "biggest storm ever" or "4 storms combining into one", or "it's going to stall for a long time in one spot", or other atypical aspects of your standard hurricane during the season.

Easy. Read zerohedge, naturalnews.com, and infowars.

I don't know about make "from scratch".

Maybe give a nudge in a certain direction and/or intensify an existing storm? Might be possible

https://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2006/09jan_electrichurricanes

https://youtu.be/JYUT25Uqs0k

If the hurricane has tons of lightning, or refuels itself over land, I'm suspicious

One that acts like Harvey. All hurricanes are natural but can be seeded and guided...

And they all can be dissipated via explosion.

Water is 2° hotter than normal, feeding Irma, apperantly chemistry is fake so it must be microwave ovens in Alaska heating the oceans.

"Global warming isn't real, but hurricanes are deliberately amplified by warming the air! Wait..."

Watch the videos of the storm being manipulated its not that they created the storm that took a tropical storm (that died three times) that they refuled and had sit over Houston you can see these lines in the maps pushing the clouds in a certain direction, hurricanes do NOT have straight lines they are a rotating cloud system

Pretty much this.

Plus, isn't it odd that we are getting so many hurricanes within a short period of time from one another? I mean, Harvey, Irina, Jose(Tropical storm currently) and then there is mention of Karina(tropical storm currently.)

Can someone else point a time with such consecutive hurricanes/storms?

I remember at some point there were 6 storms, two of them hurricanes.

I'm not biased my dad use to work for NASA and worked on manipulating weather but he said they couldn't do it it wasn't until I watched the radar video (there are radar videos) that I saw the straight lines from them pushing the storm and holding it over Houston

The military has documented use of geoengineering like haarp. Weather modification has been being used to manipulate the weather and from my understanding to be used as a weapon, for example causing a storm in a place so the enemy cant get their jets off the ground etc. Any new technology the military is using is always gonna be classified. But i also read that when they test in certain areas it gets picked up by the jet stream therefore affecting the weather in different areas.

I haven't exactly seen much in the way of proof from you, so I'm not wasting my day researching this for you.

Its not that list.