posted 07-22-2002 04:56 AM            

--William Cohen 1997

Would the device the former D.S. is speaking of qualify as a tectonic weapon?

According to retired Lt. Col. Tom Bearden, the answer is yes.

"The weapons referred to by Secretary Cohen are longitudinal EM wave interferometers (LWIs). Longitudinal EM waves easily travel through the ocean and earth with very little loss. In a distant interference zone, there appears real EM energy again, of the kind we have in our textbooks. However, the energy arises from spacetime itself in the interference zone, as proven by M.W. Evans, P.K. Anastasovski, T.E. Bearden et al., "On Whittaker's Representation of the Electromagnetic Entity in Vacuo: The Production of Transverse Fields and Energy by Scalar Interferometry," Journal of New Energy, 4(3), Winter 1999, p. 76-78. (That entire issue of JNE contains some 60 papers by the Alpha Foundation's Institute for Advanced Study (AIAS), dealing with the kind of higher symmetry electrodynamics needed to understand such weapons)."

posted 07-22-2002 08:48 PM            

Here's another snippet by Bearden:

posted 07-25-2002 09:04 PM            

I never thought I was arguing, I was just presenting someone else's hypothesis.

Go to Bearden's website and read some of his material, I think you would find them interesting.
http://www.cheniere.org/toc.html

posted 07-25-2002 09:19 PM            

The irony is that you can take a look at HR2977 and out of all the various technologies mentioned the only one you attempt to refute is a possible 'tectonic' weapon.

Considering your choice not to refute the other claims, it would be a logical notion that your silence is acceptance. Granted that I don't have the knowledge to say for sure weather or not we have tectonic weapons, I know for a fact that most of the other technologies do in fact exist, and are in fact operational. This thread got off a bit in referrence to the tectonics, but that is somewhat irrelevant. The point was that 90% of the mentioned technologies exist and are operative. The possibility that perhaps one of all those technologies (tectonics) is not yet operational is insiginificant.

Pacer I understand you are not in the intelligence community and I realize that you likely have no more official access to such information than I do. Admittedly I am still somewhat sceptical because I don't believe you are approaching this objectively. Do you realize that a large portion of what used to be the earths natural geomagnetic energy is now synthetic??? Do you have any Idea how much this planet has been exploited by such sinister operations?? For God's Sake.

You know as well as I do that there is nothing but profit and greed behind all of it. Ultimately, it's nothing but pure ignorance.

posted 07-25-2002 11:43 PM               

quote:

---

EM weapons aren't in the same category as tectonics

---

It all depends on the delivery system as to what can be considered a tectonic weapon Pacer. One does not necesarily have to drop a bomb on a fault or launch a missile to cause an earthquake.

Hypothetically, EM or EMP weapons (or whatever you want to call them) could manipulate the ionosphere and magnetic bands around the earth by heating it up and thus cause an upheaval in the earth’s tectonic plates.

There is also a theory that solar activity can cause earthquakes but it hasn't been proven yet. However, earthquakes have occurred during periods of increased solar activity and it is possible that the activity could cause a sudden heat up of the Ionosphere just long enough to trigger an event.

SOLAR ACTIVITY EARTHQUAKE TRIGGER THEORY

posted 07-26-2002 04:58 PM               

I'm not going to get into a pissing contest over the availability of information to me, and in any case, I'm not really supposed to tell you what security clearance I do have. Part of OPSEC, if you can understand.

Dan:

OK, let me try to explain this to you. Faults are structures within rock units. Some faults are related to tectonic activity, and some are not. I know perfectly well that you don't need to set off a weapon to release the energy in a fault line. In fact, earthquakes actually cause other earthquakes.

There has been some debate over whether or not Russia ever developed an "earthquake machine" as some put it. Certainly you can find ways to induce an earthquake, but the problem is inducing the earthquake at a point specific to your needs. Simply causing a massive force (such as atmospheric forces) would set off earthquakes at a number of locations. The only way to specifically target a particular fault would be to use localized means. But even this is subject to much speculation than anything else.

posted 07-26-2002 10:36 PM               

I wish conspiracies would be more prevalent. In that case, as an accident investigator I could simply stamp "pilot error" or something like that on the case. But 9.5 times out of 10, the accident or incident is caused by a number of events linked to each other in the fact they caused the accident, but otherwise unrelated.

I feel, through my own observations of "how things work" in the military, in civilian life, and in aviation, that this is most of what you see, not a concerted effort on behalf of a few people hidden in some dark conference room plotting some nefarious operation.

Problems in our lives, and with our nation and planet, are so complex and at times frightening that it's easy to simply create grandiose schemes hatched by "TPTB".