posted 08-30-2001 11:57 PM            

Thought I'd include that article about the microwave/satellite technology.

Crop Circles and Microwaves

By Bill Hamilton
Executive Director
Skywatch International, Inc.

Some have speculated as to whether the beautiful crop circle formations are caused directly by microwave beams of energy. The speculation is that such microwaves would be beamed from an orbiting satellite.

Back during the 70s, the DOE and NASA jointly studied a Satellite Solar Power system. The result of this study was a design for an SPS which consisted of a 5 x 10 kilometer (3 x 6 mile) rectangular solar collector and a 1-kilometer-diameter (0.6 mile) circular transmitting antenna array. The SPS would weigh 30,000 to 50,000 metric tons. The power would be beamed to the Earth in the form of microwaves at a frequency of 2.45 GHz (2450 MHz), which can pass unimpeded through clouds and rain. This frequency has been set aside for industrial, scientific, and medical use, and is the same frequency used in microwave ovens. Equipment to generate the microwaves is therefore inexpensive and readily available, though higher frequencies have been proposed as well. The rectenna array would be an ellipse 10 x 13 kilometers (6 x 8 miles) in size. It could be designed to let light through, so that crops, or even solar panels, could be placed underneath it.

The peak intensity of the microwave beam would be 23 milliwatts per square centimeter (148 milliwatts per square inch). The US standard for industrial exposure to microwaves is 10 milliwatts per square centimeter, while up to 5 milliwatts per square centimeter are allowed to leak from microwave ovens.

Microwaves and RF will penetrate deeper than optical radiations, and can effect internal organs. Effects which are known to occur at "thermal" intensities include heat stress, depressed spermatogenesis, teratogenesis, increased heart rate and ocular effects (cataracts and damage to endothelium layer of cornea). Other principle effects which may be thermal but on a cellular level (i.e., "micro-thermal") or caused by some non-thermal mechanism include behavioral, immunologic, CNS and neuroendocrine system effects, all shown in animal studies. Current research is investigating synergistic effects, including cancer promotion.

Few know that the sun is our strongest source of natural microwaves (as well as light, IR, and UV radiation).

Giving support to the theory that bent stalks in crop formations are due to microwave exposure are the findings of Dr. Levengood. Stalks which are usually enlarged, stretched from the inside out by something which seems to heat the nodes from the inside. Sometimes this effect is so powerful, the node literally explodes from the inside out, blowing holes in the node walls and spewing sap outside the stalk. This has been measured in thousands of samples to a degree of 95% to 99% probability ("significant" to "highly significant," in the language of sci-ence). Dr. Levengood has duplicated this effect using microwaves.

However, it is speculated that when the spirals are made in the crop, the swirling energy passing through earth's magnetic field as a plasma is the most likely source of natural microwave emission, and not something beamed from orbit.

An antenna beaming microwaves from orbit would have to be quite large to prevent the beam from diverging over a large area. The reason that the SPS must be so large has to do with the physics of power beaming. The smaller the transmitter array, the larger the angle of divergence of the transmitted beam. A highly divergent beam will spread out over a great deal of land area, and may be too weak to activate the rectenna. In order to obtain a sufficiently concentrated beam, a great deal of power must be collected and fed into a large transmitter array.

In my opinion, I believe that those crop formations that are assessed to have stalks bent by microwave heating and producing electrical charges and not made by hoaxers are due to sources that materialize the formation from nearby emitters, possibly something which can come from an alien source, a source which most certainly is not only intelligent, but extremely artistic. I doubt that military satellites are beaming microwaves from orbit as hazardous as the energies would be to plant, animal, and human life. Even though the photon energy is not directly related to the power densities required, the extreme control over pattern making from a distance seems highly unlikely. I opt for a natural source of microwaves as a byproduct of an artificially-induced phenomenon (the authentic crop circles).

Sincerely,
Bill Hamilton
Executive Director
Skywatch International, Inc.
websites: http://home.earthlink.net/~skywatcher22 http://home.earthlink.net/~skywatcher12 http://home.earthlink.net/~xplorerx http://home.earthlink.net/~xplorerx2

Source and credit: Skywatch International Inc. website - http://www.skywatch-international.org

posted 08-31-2001 05:24 AM            

I can't find that DNA/RNA crop circle article. Not that it isn't there--I just can't figure out where it is. Could you copy it over here if it's not too long? I'll be gone for the weekend, but I'll take a look at it when I get back. Blessings on all for the Labor Day holiday!

posted 08-31-2001 10:30 AM            

quote:

---

Filer's Files

Files #35
UFOs are reported in Maine, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Oklahoma, California, Washington, and Australia.

ENGLAND ALIEN FACE CROP CIRCLE INDICATES CONTACT?

CHILBOLTON RADIO TELESCOPE -- Two new incredible Crop Circle pictograms or glyphs appeared in Southsea, Hampshire next to the radio telescope gives evidence of extraterrestrial contact. The first glyph appeared on Tuesday,August 14, 2001, that shows a framed alien face with large dark eyes and a small mouth. According to an employee at the Chilbolton Observatory on Monday, August 20th, a second glyph appeared of a framed complicated binary code that seems to a reply to a message broadcast from the Arecibo Radio Telescope in Puerto Rico on November 16, 1974. Astronomer Frank Drake was in charge and with Carl Sagan sent a strong signal into space towards M-13 a star system 25,000 light years away. That radio signal depicted a stick drawing of a human and the Earth's location in the solar system.

The makers of the glyphs would like us to believe that extraterrestrials intercepted the signal and returned it to the wrong radio telescope not as a radio signal, but as a glyph drawing in the wheat. The reply glyph informs us that the aliens have large heads in comparison to their smaller bodies, gives their DNA, and that they apparently live on Mars and Jupiter if you assume they are in our solar system. The glyphs are composed of hundreds of little cells acting as pixels in the wheat. Radio show host Whitley Strieber claims he was warned the glyphs were coming and there are rumors it is part of a TV show. I would recommend we withhold judgment until scientists can closely examine the glyphs to determine how they were made. See www.cropcircleconnector.com/ http://www.earthfiles.com/earth271.htm

A research biologist writes, "Many people have been speculating whether the new Arecibo crop pictogram in Chilbolton is a hoax or real? The purpose of this message is: (a) to explain why the DNA part of that pictogram was altered from Sagan's original; and (b) to suggest a return message. The central part of the Chilbolton pictogram shows that a DNA double helix as found on Earth, with 10 base pairs per turn, has been replaced on one side by a novel single-stranded helix with just 6 bases per turn. I had to work hard for several days, to discover that the single-stranded helix with 6 bases per turn refers to 2', 5'-linked RNA or DNA, as opposed to the normal 3', 5' variety. This is known to hardly any molecular biologist, and I found out only by making an accurate model. Since the chemical formula of the 6-base helix remains the same as before, I guessed that any difference might be one of stereochemistry: change the sugar-phosphate connection. A tiny single-digit change in the central "rod" of that pictogram, located between the two nucleic acid strands, may confirm such a change in stereochemistry once it is mapped accurately.

In any case, there is no other plausible way of constructing a 6-fold helix as indicated. (a) "Association of 2', 5' ligoribonucleotides," Nucleic Acids Research 1992, vol. 20, pp. 1685-1690. This paper shows that 2', 5'-linked RNA will form double helices, but prefers to remain single stranded. (b) "Synthesis and biological activities of 2', 5'-oligoadenylate," Nucleic Acids Research 1995, vol. 23, pp. 3989-3994. This paper explores the use of 2', 5' RNA as an antiviral drug; it seems we have been exposed to such strange molecules in the past, and have evolved an interferon-RNAase L system against them. (c) "2', 5' linked deoxyribonucleosides: thermal stability", Nucleic Acids Research 1997, vol. 25, pp. 3310-3317. This paper shows that 2', 5' DNA will form a double helix with RNA but not DNA; hence any 2', 5' infectious agents would not be detectable by PCR.

Recall that origin-of-life experiments in the 1980's by Leslie Orgel, found that RNA would often polymerize into two different forms, namely 2', 5 versus 3', 5'; and it was a mystery to chemical evolutionists why 3', 5' was favored on Earth. Note that many abductees remain ill with chronic fatigue, which generally includes a high level of RNAase L; just as if their immune systems have been activated by contact with 2', 5' RNA. The clear implication is that 2', 5' RNA may represent an alternative system of genetic coding to 3',5' RNA or DNA as found on Earth; and that the makers of the Chilbolton pictogram wished us to understand that fact. Whether a secret band of elite scientists could hoax such a result seems doubtful; since 2', 5' nucleic acids are mentioned rarely in the literature, and nowhere does it say that they form a single-stranded helix with 6 bases per turn. That I found only recently, by painstakingly constructing an accurate model.

If the message is authentic, one must wonder whether it was sent by radio some time ago, yet not made public? Finally, George let me suggest a "return message" that could open communication rapidly. I suggest that you ask people all around the world to write the following in deserts, beaches, forests, crops, and on all frequencies of amateur radio: "2', 5' --- 6 ............ 3', 5' --- 10 " Or simply "6 /10" if they are lazy. But the full message is better. Thanks to Red Setter.

---

posted 09-03-2001 06:21 PM            

As you know, RNA and DNA are very long molecules, made up of subunits called nucleotides. The nucleotides are designated by the letters ACGU for RNA and ACGT for DNA. Each nucleotide contains a five-carbon sugar called ribose. It is the riboses which are joined together, single file, to form the backbone of RNA and DNA.

The ribose is the blue pentagon-shaped structure. At the apex of the pentagon is the letter "O" which stands for oxygen. At each of the points of the pentagon is a carbon molecule. For convenience, each of the carbons in the ribose is numbered, proceeding clockwise from the oxygen molecule. The first carbon is called 1', the second is 2', the third is 3' and the fourth is 4'. You will notice that there is a vertical line attached to the 4' carbon. The top of the line is another carbon, which is designated the 5' carbon of ribose.

You will also see a yellow circle with the letter "P" and 4 "O"s in it. That's a phosphate group. When DNA or RNA is synthesized, an enzyme links the 3' carbon of the first ribose to the phosphate-5' carbon of a second ribose. Once that is done, the enzyme links the 3' carbon of the second ribose to the phosphate-5' carbon of a third ribose. And so on. That's called a 3'5' linkage. In order for the linkage to happen, there must be a hydroxyl (OH) group on the 3' carbon or the reaction won't go. This type of reaction happens in both DNA and in RNA.

Unlike DNA, RNA also has an OH group on its 2' carbon. So theoretically, the RNA linkage could go from the 2' carbon of the first ribose to the phosphate-5' carbon of a second ribose. That's what the guy in the Filer Files is talking about. He says

quote:

---

The central part of the Chilbolton pictogram shows that a DNA double helix as found on Earth, with 10 base pairs per turn, has been replaced on one side by a novel single-stranded helix with just 6 bases per turn. I had to work hard for several days, to discover that the single-stranded helix with 6 bases per turn refers to 2', 5'-linked RNA or DNA, as opposed to the normal 3', 5' variety. ...there is no other plausible way of constructing a 6-fold helix as indicated. (a) "Association of 2', 5' ligoribonucleotides," Nucleic Acids Research 1992, vol. 20, pp. 1685-1690. This paper shows that 2', 5'-linked RNA will form double helices, but prefers to remain single stranded.

---

All of this sounds quite plausible on a molecular level. Biologically, it may present a problem.

RNA makes a nifty molecule. (It got me a Ph.D., for instance!) However, it has its limitations. Unlike DNA, it isn't very long-lived. On earth, anyway, there are all sorts of extremely hardy enzymes whose sole purpose in life is breaking down RNA. That's not helpful if we're talking about the destruction of an individual's genetic information.

Classical 3'5' RNA is able to form a double helix, like DNA. The advantage of the double helix is that the cell has redundancy in its genetic information. If some of the bases get damaged in one strand, the cellular machinery can always go to the other strand to get the information and make the connection. However, according to the citation above, the 2'5' RNA apparently prefers to exist in a single-stranded condition. When only a single strand of genetic information is present and its information is damaged, the cell can either go on "as is" and risk something like cancer, or it can self-destruct. Going on "as is" is fine for single-stranded RNA entities like the AIDS virus. It's a good way to get mutations which can thwart the latest anti-AIDS drugs. Almost every mutated AIDS virus dies, but in the long run, if even one mutation is a successful one, it is worth the cost. But in a multicellular organism, you would either have a situation where numerous mutated cells were allowed to proliferate and possibly kill the organism, or where numerous mutated cells were continually undergoing programmed cell death. This doesn't seem particularly advantageous in a biological sense.

posted 09-03-2001 09:47 PM            

Can you go into more detail about the quartz on the ground. thanks.