|
|
Orwell knew
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 475
Location: Mid-Missouri |
 Sat Jan 22, 2005 1:30 am
|
 |
|
Hey Julian,
I agree, with the idea of POSSIBLE nuke(s) being used, if indeed this was a military attack to crush the resistance in Aceh. My understanding was that this *earthquake* epicenter was reported to be 'very' deep, perhaps deep enough for a quick decaying low level radioactive, or perhaps even huge quantities of 'plastic' type high energy explosives being used. If a test well or better yet say a dozen wells were all drilled along or around the fault line (center?) and loaded to the hilt with any kind of super high level explosive it could reasonably be determined that it would result in one hell of an effect. GUARANTEED! One is only limited by the number of wells one drills and the amount of charge, naturally. Remember, it only has to be stong enough to trip, as you alluded to, 'the coiled spring'.
With the undersea oil and mineral exploration going on in the what looks like to be the IMMEDIATE area right off from Aceh and for some time there would have been plenty of time for opportunity.
So,did it actually happen? I'm sure if anyone knows they aren't talking.
It is interesting though Julian, you mentioned a New York Times article about undersea seismec activity. Do you happen to have the link?
If the Bush Oil War machinery has indeed lay claim to being "Ruler of The High Seas" then we are further down the rode to Hitler's ressurection than I had hoped.
SmT |
| |
|
|
mark sky
Joined: 14 Oct 2000
Posts: 3616
Location: SW coast of Oregon |
| yet another therory
Thu Jan 27, 2005 5:21 pm
|
|
|
http://pesn.com/2005/01/25/6900062_Exxon_Tripped_Indonesian_Tsunami/
Indonesian Tsunami Probably Tripped by Exxon-Mobil Works
More than 1600 Indonesian troops have
guarded the Exxon-Mobil facilities in
Aceh at one time in recent years. The
Indonesian government gleans more than
$100 million per year from the works.
One cubic mile of natural gas extracted every four years at epicenter Aceh facility presents a smoking gun for man-made factor in 9.0 earthquake with accompanying tsunami that killed more than 225,000 people. Think of a gigantic boulder sitting precariously, nudged over the edge with a small lever.
Compiled by PESN from Paul Noel and JAH
ACEH, INDONESIA -- Exxon-Mobil has a 60-billion-standard-cubic-foot-per-day facility near Aceh. In the span of four years the company extracts more than one cubic mile of natural gas from the formations beneath what has turned out to be the epicenter of the Aceh earthquake. The gas field there has been producing for much longer than four years, and is one of the largest such facilities in the world.
Scientists have known for some time that earthquakes in the order of 4.0 on the Richtor scale have been caused by oil drilling and other earth intrusive practices.
click for enlargement
Correlation of Increase in Major Earthquakes to Increse in Oil Combustion
from 1900 to 2000 (ForceBorne.com)
An analogous phenomena can be seen with earthquakes associated with large Hydro Dams. For example, Fontana Dam (USTVA North Carolina) has been associated with up to 4.0 earthquakes and routinely causes 2.5 quakes some fifty-plus years after construction.
Due to its much greater scale, and the presence of six geological faults in the area, the Three Gorges Dam in China will create very large earthquakes if its reservoirs are ever filled completely. According to Chinese news reports, tremors measuring 6.1 and 5.8 on the Richter scale hit the Zhangye region at 8:41 p.m. and 8:48 p.m. on Oct. 25, 2003.
Water was drained to safe levels over the next two days, and the China Daily reported that the dams were structurally compromised: "Cracks five centimetres wide had opened in the walls of the Shuangshuzhi reservoir, while the Zhaizhaizi reservoir had developed a fissure one centimetre wide and 410 metres long", the newspaper reported.
The weight of water overlying an unstable geological formation or fault exerts incredible pressure to which the rock layers inevitably yield. Therefore it is legitimate to ask, "What role did the extraction of oil and gas from the immediate area play in the 9.0 Aceh earthquake on Dec. 26, 2004?"
World oil production alone (not including natural gas) is approximately 80 to 100 million barrels of oil per day. That is a tremendous volume of oil, too large to even visualize in your mind’s eye, which is being extracted EVERY DAY.
The world’s oilfields are pressurized naturally by natural-gas within the oil. We've all probably seen "oil gushers" on films involving oil discovery: oil shoots high into the air as it is forced out of the ground by the natural-gas pressure in the underground oilfield.
The oil is not only pressurized, but is also hot. As it is extracted, the pressure gradually decreases until the oil well is no longer pressurized. Comparable to an empty aerosol can that still has some liquid in it, but which is no longer expelled by depressing the spout, the gas pressure decreases to the point where the drilling company needs to burn energy for pumping. Thus it becomes less profitable to extract the oil.
In some cases, in order to extract the remaining oil, cold water is injected/pumped into the well, causing the oil to float on top of the injected water. As the oil well fills with cold water, the last remaining oil which floats up on top of it is forced up through the well head to the surface, until the well is "dry" – i.e. "empty", but not literally "dry" since it is now filled with water.
During these various stages of the oil-extraction process, the outer crust of the globe is gradually being depressurized and cooled internally, causing contraction for both of these reasons. When objects cool down they automatically shrink/contract in size. If you let high-pressure air or gas out of a cylinder ice forms around the outlet, and cools the entire cylinder. If you let some of the air out of a football, or basketball, the ball shrinks and goes badly out of shape.
Apply that to the Earth and you have earthquakes as the crustal layers shift in response to the loss of pressure from below while the water pressure above increases. This is simple common sense –- not rocket science. It is a fact so simple that anyone who understands the oil-extraction process would understand the effects. Or at least, they should understand.
Therefore, the people doing this oil extraction should know the risk of triggering earthquakes, even if they ignore the consequences of rapidly dropping the underground pressure -- as the financial gurus and oil executives apparently regularly do.
Should these executives and decision-makers, who are also the profit-makers, be required to accept liability for the consequences?
Another obvious fact that is never quoted in relation to global warming is that internal combustion engines do not just give off greenhouse gases, they also give off tremendous heat – every single one of them. If you try putting your hand near the cooling-radiator or exhaust manifold of a running engine, you are going to snatch it away again quickly to prevent burns. The professors never factor this into the global-warming equations, and never mention it in the news. They mention only the gas emissions.
Think about the millions of engines giving off tremendous heat every day, some all day every day. Compound this on top of the greenhouse gases and you can see why the scientists' and professors' prognostications have turned out to be wrong. The ice caps are melting much faster than the "experts" first predicted, and faster than they are still wrongly predicting now. What pressures does this shift in weight from the poles place on the planet?
If oil is continually being created deep in the earth, as some theorists argue, what happens when this new oil rises into a former oil deposit that is now filled with water? Will this also result in further earthquakes as pressure builds up with gas being forced into the same space?
To connect the dots, therefore, we have to link the rapid “harvesting” of subterranean and undersea oil, and the reason for doing so – the thirsty tanks of obsolete gas-guzzling vehicles – with the consequence of earthquakes and tsunamis. Not only in Asia, but also around the world, are many oilfields with rapidly dropping pressure, into which water is being pumped to extract the last expensive barrels. How many more disastrous quakes will humanity face as the result of this artificially-maintained appetite for fuel?
- - - -
Compiled by Sterling D. Allan.
Thanks, Mary-Sue Halliburton for editorial input.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
References
Oil Extraction Stresses Earth, Contributing to Earthquakes and Tsunamis - Previous draft of this story, published on Jan. 12, 2005, prior to information about Exxon-Mobil.
ExxonMobil, Aceh and the Tsunami - In Aceh, the company operates one of the largest gas fields in the world and they're being sued for gross human rights violations. (Democracy Now; Jan. 4, 2005) (related)
Oil Drilling and Earthquakes - cites multiple references (Google Answers; April 25, 2004)
Q. "Given the fact that oil has been pumped out of the ground 24/7/365 by thousands upon thousands of pumps all over the world for so many years, what replaces the space previously held by the oil?"
A. "the removal of oil can cause earthquakes, even in regions normally quiet when it comes to seismic activity..."
Four collaborative anecdotes - Posted below. Tesla's NY quake; San Andreas tinkering; magnetic field changes; N-bombs and quakes.
Troop deployment to guard Exxon and other vital enterprises - At least 1600 troops guarding Exxon interests alone in the Aceh region in 2001.
Exxon 'helped torture in Indonesia' - "The Asia-Pacific region contributes about 13% of ExxonMobil's worldwide production of oil and gas." Ini 2000, gas from Indonesia yielded 118 cargoes of LNG." (BBC; June 22, 2001)
OIL: The Cause of Most Earthquakes and Bad Weather - Robert L. Cook, alt energy inventor, addresses oil extraction and earthquakes; global warming and ice cap water redistribution stresses; atmospheric pressure modifications. "What would happen if the sunken earth of the Antarctic region were to spring back up (even a few hundred feet) after enough ice melts away? Could this trigger a worldwide earthquake?"
Earthquake: Coincidence or a Corporate Oil Tragedy? - "Sound bombing" or seismic tests of ocean floors to test for oil and gas had been carried out near the sites of the Tasmanian beachings recently. (Independent Media TV; Dec. 28, 2004)
Whale Beachings in Tasmania, Australia and New Zealand on November 30th, 2004
(Robin Good)
Three Gorges Dam - is situated near six active fault lines and above 15 million people.
Dam on dangerous ground - recent earthquakes (Three Gorges Probe news service; Dec. 18, 2003)
Magma Oil - List of references that support the theory that some oil is generated deep within the earth and replenished. (FreeEnergyNews directory)
When Will We Learn (PDF) - Michael Horn says that Billy Meier warned thirty years ago that earthquakes would accompany our oil and gas extraction.
Meier was specifically warned about the connection of earthquakes to the extraction of petroleum and natural gas, as well as the damming of waters and over-building of huge cities. The first confirmation I found for the petroleum connection was from Paul Segal, a geophysics professor at Stanford University in 1990.
I will be discussing this and more on the Art Bell radio show this Saturday night, Jan. 29, from 11:00 p.m. - 2:00 a.m. PST (www.coasttocoastam.com)
Art is also well known for exploring the latest developments in alternative energy sources.
Michael Horn
Authorized American Media Representative
The Billy Meier Contacts
www.theyfly.com
Feedback
Four Collaborative Anecdotes
by J.R., Jan. 27, 2005
The article was interesting. There are however three other considerations:
1) In the early 20th century Nicola Tesla was studying mechanical resonance using a dual chambered device about the size of a soda can. He strapped it to he support beams in his laboratory in NY City and generated an earthquake that shook several square blocks. There is a court order on file blocking him from further testing of the device within the city limits of NY.
2) In the early 1980's a bored laid off oil field employee in southern California dropped seismic sensors into a hole under his mobile home and monitored them using his home PC. He found regular rhythm patterns that could only be artificial before several small earthquakes. Someone was trying to relieve the stress on the San Andreas fault. He reported it to the press and the day the news hit the papers, the rhythm stopped.
3) Much has been made about the relationship between the magnetic field and the earth's crust. The magnetic field strength has dropped from 4 gauss in the air (roughly 4000 gauss in the crust) to 0.4 gauss (400 gauss in the crust) in the past 2000 years. This weakening has weakened the integrity of the crust. Further, military experiments in Russia, Greenland, Finland, and the USA using atmospheric heaters (HAARP comes to mind) cause movement in the magnetic field. These movements lead to further weakening along critical stress points.
4) There have been two good correlations done between underground nuclear testing and earthquake activity. One of them was reported on the net. I'll try to find it again and give you the address. The other one is a classified Air Force document I had access to while working in a nuclear detection outfit in the 1970's. Watch the news for underground test announcements and then watch for a couple of days and you will see as many as three 6+ quakes.
Just interesting info.
[J.R.]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
See also
Scalar Electromagnetic Weapons and their Terrorist Use: Immediate Strategic Aspects of the Asymmetric War on the U.S. - 62-pp document by Tom Bearden about man-made earthquake capabilities.
Pure Energy Systems News
code:
|
| |
|
|
julianpenrod
Joined: 07 Mar 2002
Posts: 303
Location: west caldwell, new jersey, united states |
| yet more responses to reactions
Fri Jan 28, 2005 12:21 am
|
|
|
Julian Penrod
4 Fairfield Avenue
West Caldwell, New Jersey 07006
(973) 220-1601
julianpenrod@comcast.net
January 27, 2005
To all:
Orwell knew speaks of an interpretation of the suggestion of human intervention in the "earthquake" and "tsunami" incidents in, frankly, dangerously parochial terms.
They speak, for example, of the purpose behind the incidents being to "crush the resistance in Aceh". To be sure, even revolutionaries seem to have an uncanny ability to get huge amounts of money for weaponry, and that leads me to question just how much the average "insurgency" or "band of militarists" isn't really working with CIA assistance! What better way to control world occurrences than to leave nothing to chance, even setting up your own "revolutions", so you know exactly what opponents of corrupt dicators are, and aren't, doing! To automatically assume the insurgents in Aceh as not involved in CIA domination of world events, simply because the media tells you to think that they're an independent group, is eminently unwise!
It seems closer to the truth to assert that there was a plan behind the events, but that its specifics are not necesarily immediately available!
Orwell knew also depicts a methodology for setting off the apparent explosion that started it all that is too much mired in conventionalities. They speak, for example, of digging "test wells", that are filled with atomic devices, or plastic explosive, for the purpose of triggering the "earthquake".
I thought my use of quotation marks in talking about the "quake" was an adequate enough indicator that no such thing took place! A shifting of the plates was not set into motion, by the explosion that seems to have taken place, there, rather, the explosion is what caused the "tsunamis", without there being any "earthquake" intermediary! Just because the "quake's" epicenter "was reported to be 'very deep'" doesn't mean that it was! It doesn't mean that there even was an "earthquake", just because they tell you to believe there was an earthquake! And, just because they tell you to believe there was an "earthquake" and its epicenter was "very deep" doesn't mean that it was deep! Orwell knew makes assertions on the drilling of "test wells", to accommodate the report that the epicenter was "deep", even though the very fact that the report came from an "official" source is practically tacit proof of it being unreliable! Orwell knew says "one is only limited by the number of wells one drills and the amount of charge, naturally." If the source was a single, powerful nuclear bomb on the ocean floor, there seem few limits to what one could arrange!
Incidentally, Orwell knew also limits the operation to arranging enough energy to trip the "coiled spring" of the supposedly locked tectonic plates, in that area. I spoke of a "coiled spring" only in the sense of small amounts of energy being needed to unleash large amounts, as in, say, HAARP waves setting off the plates, but the amount of energy necessary there still seems much more than can be locked into the ionosphere, without anyone noticing! I wasn't even saying there was a "coiled spring" in that area! And, even if you unlock the plates, there might not be enough pressure from convection currents in the mantle to cause a giant earthquake! And, if there wasn't even an "earthquake", just a nuclear explosion, tripping a "coiled spring" seems entirely out of the question!
As for the link to the New York Times article, I don't have the information. To arrange access to New York Times articles, you have to fill out a registration that is so involved and complicated, it looks more like a "phishing" expedition, than anything else, so I decided not to sign up. The article, though, is in the January 16, 2005 Science Times section. The article includes purportedly typical seismograms of a nuclear explosion and an earthquake. Carefully leaving out magnitudes, they assert that even nuclear bombs leave aftershocks, and the only real difference is that a bomb begins with a sudden spike, while an earthquake has small quakes leading up to the main quake, then it tails off, again. But, if you set off a series of small explosions, before the nuclear bomb, you could simulate an earthquake's diagram!
Not to dismiss the idea of a nuclear bomb causing the tsunamis, I could refer you to a news article, at http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=519&ncid=519&e=26&u=/ap/20050127/ap_on_re_us/stricken_vessel. Available through Yahoo, this story tells of a ship in the "Semester at Sea" program that was "temporarily disabled" when a "50-foot Pacific wave" crashed into it, apparently just south of the Aleutian Islands. Despite the fat that this wave seems on a par with what was claimed for the "tsunamis", it seems considered unrelated to any earthquakes!
It could also be indicated the reports, last year, by such organizations as NOAA, validating claims throughout history of "monster waves" on the open ocean, as much as 70 feet tall! There seem to have been reports of as many as one hundred such waves being observed in even a limited survey! These don't seem to be related to any ongoing earthquake activity, either!
This is not to say that the "tsunamis" that hit the islands in the Indian Ocean are a clutch of these "monster waves", but, rather, that NOAA and others want people to see these waves as normal and regular, because the government plan a massive program of ocean floor nuclear detonations, in the near future!
Julian Penrod |
| |
|
|
Orwell knew
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 475
Location: Mid-Missouri |
|
Sun Jan 30, 2005 4:28 pm
|
|
|
Hi Julian,
Really all I'm trying to say is obviously there seem to be MANY possibilities as to what may have caused the tsunami tragedy. Barring substantial evidence that weighs heavily in one direction (for me personally), I leave many possibilies open.
The whole area appears to be one huge naturally unstable area, and when you add all of the blasting, and sounding, and drilling, and pumping out of miles of underground gas and oil reserves, it simply sounds like an accident waiting to happen. As I said before I have NO idea if this was an intentional act or not and if so in what precise manner it was carried out, I simply leave the question unanswered for now barring further evidence. The only point I made was that obviously with the civil unrest there in Aceh and ExxonMobil having to pay out milions and millions of dollars for protection to do business, the tsunami MAY have been a blessing for them as a way to gain more control over the population and resources. And as access to oil and gas has become one of the highest priorities being enforced by our military, an attack to allow greater access or eliminate opposition should not be out of the question.
It could have been something as 'simple' as igniting some of the many miles of underground caverns of natural gas surrounding Aceh. Intentionally OR not, I don't know, and admit, I don't know. As more info becomes available or as the info I have now begins to present itself in a manner suggesting one direction over another I perhaps will form a more definate opinion. So to sum up, and be quite clear, and for the record, let it be said, I remain unsure. At this point. 
SmT |
| |
|
|
mark sky
Joined: 14 Oct 2000
Posts: 3616
Location: SW coast of Oregon |
| Tsunami bomb NZ's devastating war secret
Mon Feb 14, 2005 7:27 pm
|
|
|
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/index.cfm?ObjectID=14727
Tsunami bomb NZ's devastating war secret
By Eugene Bingham
Top-secret wartime experiments were conducted off the coast of Auckland to perfect a tidal wave bomb, declassified files reveal.
An Auckland University professor seconded to the Army set off a series of underwater explosions triggering mini-tidal waves at Whangaparaoa in 1944 and 1945.
Professor Thomas Leech's work was considered so significant that United States defence chiefs said that if the project had been completed before the end of the war it could have played a role as effective as that of the atom bomb.
Details of the tsunami bomb, known as Project Seal, are contained in 53-year-old documents released by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade.
Papers stamped "top secret" show the US and British military were eager for Seal to be developed in the post-war years too. They even considered sending Professor Leech to Bikini Atoll to view the US nuclear tests and see if they had any application to his work.
He did not make the visit, although a member of the US board of assessors of atomic tests, Dr Karl Compton, was sent to New Zealand.
"Dr Compton is impressed with Professor Leech's deductions on the Seal project and is prepared to recommend to the Joint Chiefs of Staff that all technical data from the test relevant to the Seal project should be made available to the New Zealand Government for further study by Professor Leech," said a July 1946 letter from Washington to Wellington.
Professor Leech, who died in his native Australia in 1973, was the university's dean of engineering from 1940 to 1950.
News of his being awarded a CBE in 1947 for research on a weapon led to speculation in newspapers around the world about what was being developed.
Though high-ranking New Zealand and US officers spoke out in support of the research, no details of it were released because the work was on-going.
A former colleague of Professor Leech, Neil Kirton, told the Weekend Herald that the experiments involved laying a pattern of explosives underwater to create a tsunami.
Small-scale explosions were carried out in the Pacific and off Whangaparaoa, which at the time was controlled by the Army.
It is unclear what happened to Project Seal once the final report was forwarded to Wellington Defence Headquarters late in the 1940s.
The bomb was never tested on a full scale, and Mr Kirton doubts that Aucklanders would have noticed the trials.
"Whether it could ever be resurrected ... Under some circumstances I think it could be devastating." |
| |
|
|
 
|
|
 Goto page Previous
1, 2, 3, 4, 5
All times are GMT. The time now is Sat May 26, 2012 5:30 pm
|
|
|
|
|
Login
