Chemtrail Central
Login
Member List
Image Database
Chemtrail Forum
Active Topics
Who's Online
Search
Research
Flight Explorer
Unidentifiable
FAQs
Phenomena
Disinformation
Silver Orbs
Transcripts
News Archive
Channelings
Etcetera
PSAs
Media
Vote


Chemtrail Central
Search   FAQs   Messages   Members   Profile
Chemflame video

Post new topic Reply to topic
Chemtrail Central > The Neutral Zone

Author Thread
Thermit





Joined: 08 Jul 2000
Posts: 3137
Location: Texas
PostSat Nov 17, 2001 9:51 pm  Reply with quote  

 View user's profile Visit poster's website Send private message
Chem11





Joined: 21 Apr 2001
Posts: 1386
PostSat Nov 17, 2001 11:01 pm  Reply with quote  

Trippy, dude.

"Although less than 1% of the upper atmosphere becomes ionised the charged particles make the gas electrically conducting, which completely changes its characteristics."
http://www.dcs.lancs.ac.uk/iono/opps/introduction.html

I'm not real sure what Mr. Carnicom has done to incur your wrath, 3T3, but I do know that he has done as much to bring awareness of this issue as anyone that posts on this or any other message board.

For that, I think he deserves at least a smidgen of respect. Doesn't mean you can't engage in constructive criticism but claiming he is 'giving us all a black eye' is something of a overstatement, IMO.

[Edited 1 times, lastly by Chem11 on 11-17-2001]
 View user's profile Send private message
3T3L1





Joined: 08 Mar 2001
Posts: 1344
Location: Lubbock, Texas
PostSat Nov 17, 2001 11:16 pm  Reply with quote  

He has done bad science, Chem. That doesn't make him a bad person, but the chemtrail awareness he has raised does not slop over and make his science good.
 View user's profile Send private message
theseeker





Joined: 25 Jul 2000
Posts: 3403
Location: Damnit...I'm a doctor jim
PostSat Nov 17, 2001 11:30 pm  Reply with quote  

bad science

lol...I heard here the other day that NASA was having to cut back on some of the mars global surveyor experiments because of a shortage in *hair-perm solution*...

grins...



[Edited 1 times, lastly by theseeker on 11-17-2001]
 View user's profile Visit poster's website Send private message
Chem11





Joined: 21 Apr 2001
Posts: 1386
PostSat Nov 17, 2001 11:48 pm  Reply with quote  

I know I'm going to be sorry I asked, but what is the connection between NASA and hair-styling, G?

And before this thread drifts any further, a little reminder that the topic of discussion is the phenomena depicted in Eyesopen's video and the USAF's interest in plasma based applications:

 View user's profile Send private message
3T3L1





Joined: 08 Mar 2001
Posts: 1344
Location: Lubbock, Texas
PostSat Nov 17, 2001 11:59 pm  Reply with quote  

The hair perm solution refers to a "reagent" Mr. Carnicom used to try to determine the identity of chemtrail webs. It's sort of emblematic of his determination to do all his science on his own, without getting consultations from the broader scientific community.
 View user's profile Send private message
Chem11





Joined: 21 Apr 2001
Posts: 1386
PostSun Nov 18, 2001 12:22 am  Reply with quote  

I knew I was going to be sorry.

Listen-

I did not start this thread to give people the opportunity to air their grievances (legitimate or otherwise) with Mr. Carnicom. It would be nice if we could at least look at each others research without getting into these devisive conflicts.

If someone wants to start a 'Clifford Carnicom is a bad scientist' thread, be my guest. But that is NOT the topic of this particular thread.

Perhaps I am making a mistake by trying to have an intelligent conversation regarding the possible connection between plasma based research and observed phenomena in this particular section.

Oh well.

 View user's profile Send private message
3T3L1





Joined: 08 Mar 2001
Posts: 1344
Location: Lubbock, Texas
PostSun Nov 18, 2001 1:18 am  Reply with quote  

I thought I *was* trying to discuss it intelligently. But my questions weren't being answered and we got off topic. Sorry.
 View user's profile Send private message
theseeker





Joined: 25 Jul 2000
Posts: 3403
Location: Damnit...I'm a doctor jim
PostSun Nov 18, 2001 1:49 am  Reply with quote  

last time I looked this was not cttxxx and on or off topic did not make a tinkers damn...

and also chem you asked 3t3 what her reasoning was about carnicom, she answered, therefore you initiated the off-topic discussion....

chem lighten up

btw did you read toxdoc's link ?

g-ster
 View user's profile Visit poster's website Send private message
Chem11





Joined: 21 Apr 2001
Posts: 1386
PostSun Nov 18, 2001 2:08 am  Reply with quote  

It matters to me, T/S. There's a time to screw around and there's a time to actually try and get something accomplished.

And like I said, I'm sorry I asked about your reference. Let's move on.

Invulnerable and invisible

The U.S. Air Force allocates some $10 million a year for research geared toward satellite protection. Of that amount, $2 million is dedicated to low-temperature plasma studies...

Poke a finger inside Laroussiís tabletop plasma-generating apparatus and all youíll get from the bluish, pilot-light-like ionized gas is a slight tingle. But the harmless sensation is misleading, since it doesnít give a complete picture of plasmaís power. Depending on how a plasma is "tuned," or how it is made more dense by increasing its frequency, it could ward off microwave bursts and discharges from ground-based, energized sources of potential damage and disruption.

Swirling in and around one another, a plasmaís charged particles interact constantly, giving rise to localized attractions or repulsions. External energy splashing against the plasma --- say, from a potentially disabling, concentrated burst of microwaves, or perhaps even from certain varieties of particle-beam weapons fired from military bases on Earth -- could be caught up within the plasmaís complex electromagnetic fields to be dissipated completely or deflected into space.

"In theory, a plasma could deflect a particle beam or laser attack," Laroussi says. "It depends on what youíre shooting at it and how high you can tune the plasma frequency. That doesnít mean itís easy or practically achievable, particularly with a cold plasma. Itís a tough requirement to meet at present."

Cloaking mirrors

A nearer-term application is cloaking. With the proper adjustments, a plasma can be made into a kind of energy mirror, reflecting back or away incoming electromagnetic waves, such as those emitted from ground-based radars. In essence, any spacecraft outfitted with this kind of plasma field would be completely cloaked from the probing attentions of radar operators.

"The idea is to deflect or absorb the energy completely," Laroussi said. "If you absorb the energy --- completely dissipating it within the plasma --- the radar doesnít see anything. Nothing reflects back."

Less immediately space-like, but no less practical, are biological applications. Cold plasmas allow for rapid decontamination of clothing, equipment or personal gear. In disrupting the integrity of cell membranes, the plasmas appear to offer a rapid, simple and inexpensive means of destroying even the hardiest bacterial spores. At present, sterilization time can run hours; use of a cold plasma could sanitize in mere minutes.

http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/technology/cold_plasma_000724.html
 View user's profile Send private message
Chem11





Joined: 21 Apr 2001
Posts: 1386
PostSun Nov 18, 2001 2:14 am  Reply with quote  

Boeing considers feasibility of plasma-based weapons

NICK COOK JDW Aerospace Consultant
London

The Phantom Works, Boeing's prototyping organisation, has raised the possibility of plasma-based directed-energy weapons equipping a future breed of hypersonic aircraft platforms, such as those favoured for research and development by the Bush administration.

George Muellner, vice president and general manager of the Phantom Works, said that it should prove feasible to "skim off" some of the plasma that forms naturally around a M8.0 aerospace vehicle for use by an onboard directed-energy weapon.

Plasmas are ionised gases found naturally in lightning discharges and are commonly used in neon light tubes. They also build around the nose and leading edges of hypersonic vehicles and space re-entry systems as the air in front of them is shocked to high temperature.

Muellner's remarks are evidence of growing US interest in plasmas for a variety of aerospace applications. Russian designers have touted the benefits of plasmas for years, but officially their claims have been greeted with scepticism by the US aerospace establishment.

Russian companies and research institutions that have applied plasmas to aircraft have reported sizeable reductions in aircraft drag and the delayed onset of shock waves. "We've been doing work with the Russians and we've been doing plasma work on our own and we have seen considerable improvements in drag and sonic boom attenuation," Muellner said.

He downplayed US enthusiasm for other plasma benefit claimed by the Russians - a means of drastically reducing an aircraft's radar signature. "There's no way to effectively engineer it," he said, adding that the power and weight penalties imposed by plasma-generators would most likely outweigh the stealth benefits. Despite this, Russian engineers claim to have developed 'bolt-on' plasma-generators that dramatically cut an aircraft's radar cross-section while preserving its aerodynamic qualities; something, they say, that cannot be said of first-generation US stealth aircraft like the angular F-117A.

Muellner said that the use of naturally forming plasmas on a high-Mach aerospace vehicle could, in the long term, be applied "as a huge energy resource" to a directed-energy weapon for self-defence purposes. Observers have pointed out that such weapons could also be used offensively.

There are two possible engineering approaches. One is to divert the plasma into a chamber, excite it, introduce a laser-critical gas such as argon and direct the resultant energy through high-power optics as a laser beam. The other is to wrap small compact rings or 'toroids' of plasma energy in intense magnetic fields and fire them from a weapon as 'bullets' at air or ground targets.

In the early 1990s, the US Air Force was preparing tests at Kirtland Air Force Base, New Mexico, designed to lead to a ground-based plasma-weapon in the late 1990s capable of firing plasma bullets at incoming ballistic missile warheads. The enabling technology was a 'fast capacitor bank' called Shiva Star that could store 10 million joules of energy and release it instantaneously. Officials anticipated firing bullets at 3,000km/sec in 1995 and 10,000km/sec - 3% of the speed of light - by the turn of the century. The tests absorbed little more than a few million dollars of annual funding (Jane's Defence Weekly 29 July 1998).

Dumped into the 'soft' electronics of a re-entry vehicle, the bullets were envisaged as destroying multiple manoeuvring warheads at rapid reacquisition rates. By the second half of the last decade, the Shiva/plasma bullet programme was officially dropped. Observers have remarked on how its sudden disappearance at the time the firing tests were scheduled was redolent of a transition to the classified environment.
http://www.janes.com/defence/air_forces/news/jdw/jdw010328_1_n.shtml
 View user's profile Send private message
theseeker





Joined: 25 Jul 2000
Posts: 3403
Location: Damnit...I'm a doctor jim
PostSun Nov 18, 2001 2:28 am  Reply with quote  

chem you sure have been a stuffy SOB since your return...

this is old but interesting...

http://www.fas.org/news/russia/1995/tac95060.htm

In the opinion of our scientists the experiment could cost around $300 million. This by the way is four orders of magnitude less than what was planned in the USA's budget for creation of its own plasma weapon. Russia doesn't have this kind of money now. That's why our country suggested to the United States back in 1993 that we join efforts to create a global ABM system. Experts also feel that were the USA to continue working on this problem on its own, the expenses would total $30 billion, with no firm certainty of success. As far as we know, Bill Clinton hasn't yet communicated with Boris Yeltsin regarding the "Trust" experiment. Possibly because the Russian plasma weapon is based on discoveries in several areas of science that are deeply developed in Russia but have not yet been sufficiently studied in the USA. And no politician or scientist likes to show his ignorance.

T/S
 View user's profile Visit poster's website Send private message
Chem11





Joined: 21 Apr 2001
Posts: 1386
PostSun Nov 18, 2001 3:44 am  Reply with quote  

That's more like like it!

Recent advances in plasma-generating technology allow for a much more cost-effective solution, but you can see how serious both Russia and the US were about developing these apps by the numbers they were throwing around a few years ago.

$30 BILLION budgeted for development of our own plasma weapon and the Russians could pull it off for a measly 30 mil.

It sure sounds like someone found a way of creating a plasma field that exists outside of a glass container...

P.S. I've always been a stuffy SOB, T/S. You've just gotten used to being able to goof-off at will during my abscence.

Or as somebody once said:

I have come to kick ass and chew bubble gum.

 View user's profile Send private message
Chem11





Joined: 21 Apr 2001
Posts: 1386
PostSun Nov 18, 2001 3:48 am  Reply with quote  

And I'm all out of Bubble gum.

Air Force Office of Scientific Research Funds Laser Plasma Thruster...

Dr. Claude Phipps and Dr. James Luke use a torsion balance tool to measure the pressure of light produced by a laser beam.
The Air Force Office of Scientific Research (AFOSR) announced January 28, 2000, a $400,000 STTR (Small Business Technology Transfer) Phase II award to Photonic Associates. The award will fund prototype development of a laser plasma thruster for micro- and nano-satellite propulsion. New Mexico Engineering Research Institute is subcontractor and provides laboratory space for this project.

Laser plasma thrusters operate on the principle that lasers produce ablation pressure by ablating or boiling material off a surface in what is referred to as a jet and, in the weightless environment of space, that this pressure can actually be used to propel small (micro) and very small (nano) satellites. A simple semiconductor laser device produces a light bright enough to generate a spark (jet). The pressure of the jet, delivered in precise bursts, will alter the trajectory of an already orbiting satellite.
Phase I, a one-year project also funded by AFOSR, demonstrated the feasibility of using laser ablation for propulsion. Dr. Claude Phipps of Photonic Associates and Dr. James Luke of NMERI used a torsion balance tool built by Luke to measure the actual pressure of light. The tool, able to measure pressures ten times less than the impact of a flying mosquito hitting a wall, was essential in demonstrating the possibilities of using laser-produced jets as thrusters.

http://nmeri.unm.edu/Archived-News/Laser-thrusters.htm



[Edited 1 times, lastly by Chem11 on 11-17-2001]
 View user's profile Send private message
theseeker





Joined: 25 Jul 2000
Posts: 3403
Location: Damnit...I'm a doctor jim
PostSun Nov 18, 2001 5:45 am  Reply with quote  

The "fresh out of bubble gum" is a great quote from one of my favorite movies "they live" (rowdy roddy piper)...

here's another " I take these glasses off, and your ok, I put them on...formaldehyde face"....

cool stuff here :

http://www.mission.com/MRC-ATD/ATD%20Area2.html




T/S
 View user's profile Visit poster's website Send private message

Post new topic Reply to topic
Forum Jump:
Jump to:  
Goto page Previous  
1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are GMT.
The time now is Wed Feb 21, 2018 3:37 am


  Display posts from previous:      




© 21st Century Thermonuclear Productions
All Rights Reserved, All Wrongs Revenged, Novus Ordo Seclorum, All Your Base