IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 24th January 2008, 11:13 AM   #1
1337m4n
Alphanumeric Anonymous Stick Man
 
1337m4n's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 3,510
Soviet secret weapon: Hurricane Cannon

I've always thought some of the coolest conspiracy theories ("cool" does NOT mean I believe them) were those that involved relics of the Cold War: secret weapons developed by either side that remained unused by the time the Cold War ended.

This guy theorizes that the Soviets had developed a "hurricane launcher" weather-control device--and that Japanese terrorists stole it and used it to create Hurricane Katrina as revenge for Hiroshima!

http://www.usatoday.com/weather/clim...n_x.htm?csp=34


Of course, the natural problem with any "secret weapons of the Cold War" CT is that the Cold War is over, and thus there is no reason for such weapons to remain classified. Plus, I think Russia would be pretty cheesed off if they found out terrorists had stolen their toy and been "joyriding" with it. We'd definitely have heard something about this.

Still, pretty interesting.
1337m4n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th January 2008, 11:16 AM   #2
Unsecured Coins
Hoku-maniac
 
Unsecured Coins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,905
I'm waiting for the secret whiskey cannon myself
__________________
"If God wants 10% of my paycheck, he can get it himself. Or at least work for it -Kochanski
"I may not be easy, but I am fast." - Hokulele
"Oh CRAP... DQ!!" - Ol' Hokey, yet again
Unsecured Coins is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th January 2008, 11:16 AM   #3
Quad4_72
AI-EE-YAH!
 
Quad4_72's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 6,354
Wow. Thats definitely a new one. What compels a person to make up such a lie?
__________________
Looks like the one on top has a magazine, thus needs less reloading. Also, the muzzle shroud makes it less likely for a spree killer to burn his hands. The pistol grip makes it more comfortable for the spree killer to shoot. thaiboxerken
Quad4_72 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th January 2008, 11:18 AM   #4
Brainache
Nasty Brutish and Tall
 
Brainache's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Canberra
Posts: 17,473
That hurricane cannon is nothing compared to the US Government's Tsunami Generator!
Brainache is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th January 2008, 11:18 AM   #5
twinstead
Penultimate Amazing
 
twinstead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 12,374
On the American side we created HAARP to control the weather, trigger earthquakes, and shoot down space shuttles. It's beginning to sound like had the cold war become hot it would have resembled the battle for MT Olympus when Zeus took charge.
__________________
You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your INFORMED opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant. -- Harlan Ellison
twinstead is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th January 2008, 11:29 AM   #6
rwguinn
Penultimate Amazing
 
rwguinn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 16 miles from 7 lakes
Posts: 11,098
Wait a second?
Quote:
"I just got sick to my stomach because these clouds were unnatural and that meant they had (the machine) on all the time," Stevens said. "I was left trying to forecast the intent of some organization rather than the weather of this planet."
and yet ffrom the station manager:
Quote:
He's very knowledgeable about weather, and he's very popular.
setting aside the non sequitor by his bosses (what does being popular have to do with being knowledgable?), how are these two statements in any way compatable?
__________________
"Political correctness is a doctrine,...,which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."
"
I pointed out that his argument was wrong in every particular, but he rightfully took me to task for attacking only the weak points." Myriad http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=6853275#post6853275
rwguinn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th January 2008, 11:38 AM   #7
Panhead56
Scholar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 54
Originally Posted by rwguinn View Post
... setting aside the non sequitor by his bosses (what does being popular have to do with being knowledgable?), how are these two statements in any way compatable?
Beeing popular have to do with selling viewers/listeners to the companies advertising on TV, which after all is the basic business modell for all commercial tv/radio stations. Booring facts and truth, unfortunately attracts less viewers, so less money for the tv-station.

Last edited by Panhead56; 24th January 2008 at 11:39 AM.
Panhead56 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th January 2008, 11:44 AM   #8
rwguinn
Penultimate Amazing
 
rwguinn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 16 miles from 7 lakes
Posts: 11,098
Originally Posted by Panhead56 View Post
Beeing popular have to do with selling viewers/listeners to the companies advertising on TV, which after all is the basic business modell for all comercial tv/radio stations. Booring facts and truth, unfortunately attracts less viewers, so less money for the tv-station.
Where's that "Over his head" emoticon....
__________________
"Political correctness is a doctrine,...,which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."
"
I pointed out that his argument was wrong in every particular, but he rightfully took me to task for attacking only the weak points." Myriad http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=6853275#post6853275
rwguinn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th January 2008, 12:14 PM   #9
Apollo20
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,425
Chernobyl and Directed Energy Weapons

The explosion of the Unit 4 reactor of the 4000 MW Chernobyl nuclear power station, just outside Kiev in Soviet-controlled Ukraine, on April 26 1986, was probably the result of still highly classified U.S. subterfuge. Covert U.S. action was undertaken because it was deemed a matter of extreme urgency to knockout the high intensity extremely low frequency (ELF) signal emanating from the Gomel “steel yard” array, a large radar transmitter located just north of, and powered by, the ill-fated Chernobyl nuclear power station. The high-energy microwave beam emanating from Gomel was also known as the “woodpecker signal” and was aimed at selected targets in the U.S.; it was a development of the early ELF beams first used by the Soviets against the US embassy in Moscow in 1962. In the late 1970s the woodpecker signal was reported to have produced low-level effects at locations in the US northwest such as Eugene Oregon. However, by 1985, the woodpecker signal was being used by the Soviets for far more significant and destructive purposes.

The period just prior to the nuclear disaster at Chernobyl in April 1986 was a time of heightened tensions between the US and the USSR. Ronald Reagan began his second term in office in November 1984 and embarked on a program of anti-Soviet/anti-terrorist activities that included such infamous altercations as the bombing of Libya in April 1986 and military aid to the Mujahideen in Soviet-occupied Afghanistan in the period up to withdrawal of Soviet troops in 1989. This period was also notable for Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative or SDI, announced in March 1983, which was designed to develop for the US military the capability to shot down incoming Soviet ballistic missiles using directed energy weapons or DEWs.

Declassified CIA reports, prepared in late 1983 as background material for Reagan’s SDI announcement, recognized the Soviet’s pre-existing DEW capabilities:

“The Soviets has had a large, military sponsored, high-energy laser weapon program since the 1960s. One of the primary motivations for this effort is probably the development of ballistic missile defense weapons. Our best evidence in this area concerns a major program to develop the technology necessary for a ground-based laser weapon for terminal ballistic missile defense. The results of these longstanding and well-funded programs is that the Soviets are now on a par, or lead, the United States in most of the directed energy weapons technologies.”

This admission by the CIA that the Soviets were possibly leading the race for sophisticated and highly destructive “beam” weapons is underscored by the fact that an entire armada of such weapons was in fact deployed by the Soviets in May 1985. Worse yet, these weapons were “field tested” with devastating effectiveness on a number of U.S. targets in the period November 1985 to April 1986. The destruction of the Chernobyl Unit 4 reactor on April 26 1986 was the US response…….
Apollo20 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th January 2008, 01:40 PM   #10
phunk
Illuminator
 
phunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 4,127
How do you aim a microwave beam over the horizon?
phunk is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th January 2008, 01:44 PM   #11
twinstead
Penultimate Amazing
 
twinstead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 12,374
Originally Posted by Apollo20 View Post
This admission by the CIA that the Soviets were possibly leading the race for sophisticated and highly destructive “beam” weapons is underscored by the fact that an entire armada of such weapons was in fact deployed by the Soviets in May 1985. Worse yet, these weapons were “field tested” with devastating effectiveness on a number of U.S. targets in the period November 1985 to April 1986. The destruction of the Chernobyl Unit 4 reactor on April 26 1986 was the US response…….
This is the part that I would be pretty dubious of.
__________________
You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your INFORMED opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant. -- Harlan Ellison
twinstead is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th January 2008, 03:01 PM   #12
Apollo20
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,425
Phunk:

Have you never heard of over the horizon radar?

Twinstead:

Oh the old argument from incredulity line....
Apollo20 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th January 2008, 03:07 PM   #13
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
 
WildCat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 59,856
Originally Posted by 1337m4n View Post
This guy theorizes that the Soviets had developed a "hurricane launcher" weather-control device--and that Japanese terrorists stole it and used it to create Hurricane Katrina as revenge for Hiroshima!
What a flipping fool! Everyone knows that it only appeared to be the Japanese because it was actually a false flag attack by Bu$hCo!
__________________
Vive la liberté!
WildCat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th January 2008, 03:09 PM   #14
Architect
Chief Punkah Wallah
 
Architect's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 9,765
Originally Posted by Apollo20 View Post
The explosion of the Unit 4 reactor of the 4000 MW Chernobyl nuclear power station, just outside Kiev in Soviet-controlled Ukraine, on April 26 1986, was probably the result of still highly classified U.S. subterfuge. Covert U.S. action was undertaken because it was deemed a matter of extreme urgency to knockout the high intensity extremely low frequency (ELF) signal emanating from the Gomel “steel yard” array, a large radar transmitter located just north of, and powered by, the ill-fated Chernobyl nuclear power station. The high-energy microwave beam emanating from Gomel was also known as the “woodpecker signal” and was aimed at selected targets in the U.S.; it was a development of the early ELF beams first used by the Soviets against the US embassy in Moscow in 1962. In the late 1970s the woodpecker signal was reported to have produced low-level effects at locations in the US northwest such as Eugene Oregon. However, by 1985, the woodpecker signal was being used by the Soviets for far more significant and destructive purposes.
1. Ukraine was not Soviet controlled, per se, but rather a component and integrated part of the USSR - as opposed to some of the "colonial" holdings elsewhere. It would be a bit like saying "USA controlled New Jersey" or somesuch.

2. Evidence for claim of US subterfuge? "Probably" seems rather....vague.
__________________
When the men elected to make laws are but a small part of a foreign parliament, that is when all healthy national feeling dies.

James Keir Hardie (1856 - 1915): Politician, Founder of Scottish Labour Party
Architect is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th January 2008, 03:13 PM   #15
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
 
WildCat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 59,856
Originally Posted by rwguinn View Post
and yet ffrom the station manager:
Quote:
He's very knowledgeable about weather, and he's very popular.

setting aside the non sequitor by his bosses (what does being popular have to do with being knowledgable?), how are these two statements in any way compatable?
It was a misprint, what he actually said was "He's very knowledgeable about weather, and he's very bipolar". Makes perfect sense!
__________________
Vive la liberté!
WildCat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th January 2008, 03:15 PM   #16
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 26,093
Originally Posted by Apollo20 View Post
Phunk:

Have you never heard of over the horizon radar?

Twinstead:

Oh the old argument from incredulity line....
He said aim, not scatter~!

OMG, you are ...
beachnut is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th January 2008, 03:41 PM   #17
Safe-Keeper
Penultimate Amazing
 
Safe-Keeper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Norway
Posts: 10,415
Can someone explain to me what Chernobyl-powered laser cannons have to do with a storm creation machine wielded by Japanese terrorists?

Quote:
It was a misprint, what he actually said was "He's very knowledgeable about weather, and he's very bipolar". Makes perfect sense!
No, no, no, he's very knowledgeable about Heather, the cute and mysterious secretary who keeps all her intriguing secrets to herself. Hence the popularity.

PS: Why do all conspiracy theory statements have the same writing style? It's as if it's the same lonely guy making all of them up.
__________________
"He's like a drunk being given a sobriety test by the police after being pulled over. Just as a drunk can't walk a straight line, Trump can't think in a straight line. He's all over the place."--Stacyhs
"If you are still hung up on that whole words-have-meaning thing, then 2020 is going to be a long year for you." --Ladewig

Last edited by Safe-Keeper; 24th January 2008 at 03:43 PM.
Safe-Keeper is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th January 2008, 03:44 PM   #18
Architect
Chief Punkah Wallah
 
Architect's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 9,765
The girl who does the Scottish national weather forecasts on the Beeb is called Heather, hence her monicker "Heather the Weather", which of course picks up both your points....!!!
__________________
When the men elected to make laws are but a small part of a foreign parliament, that is when all healthy national feeling dies.

James Keir Hardie (1856 - 1915): Politician, Founder of Scottish Labour Party

Last edited by Architect; 24th January 2008 at 03:45 PM.
Architect is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th January 2008, 03:59 PM   #19
Norseman
Muse
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Norway
Posts: 643
I think Apollo20 is trying to pull our legs again:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Woodpecker
Norseman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th January 2008, 04:02 PM   #20
Gravy
Downsitting Citizen
 
Gravy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 17,078
During the Cold War the U.S. had a counter-weapon to the Russian Hurricane Cannon: the Hippo Hurricane Holler.
__________________
"Please, keep your chops cool and don’t overblow.” –Freddie Hubbard
Gravy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th January 2008, 04:08 PM   #21
Blue Monk
Graduate Poster
 
Blue Monk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 1,769
Quote:
Stevens said oddities in Hurricane Katrina storm patterns underpin his theory.

And, according to his website, so does the fact that Katrina and Ivan — the name given to a destructive hurricane that hit Florida in September 2004 — both sound Russian.
By golly, that's pretty convincing.

Oh my aching head.
__________________
Veni, Vidi, Velcro
I came, I saw, I stuck around
Blue Monk is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th January 2008, 04:12 PM   #22
Corsair 115
Penultimate Amazing
 
Corsair 115's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 14,519
Originally Posted by 1337m4n View Post
This guy theorizes that the Soviets had developed a "hurricane launcher" weather-control device--and that Japanese terrorists stole it and used it to create Hurricane Katrina as revenge for Hiroshima!
So what are the Japanese terrorists going to do in revenge for Nagasaki?
__________________
"We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things not because they are easy, but because they are hard. Because that goal will serve
to organize and measure the best of our abilities and skills, because that challenge is one we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and
one which we intend to win."
Corsair 115 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th January 2008, 04:14 PM   #23
Aerich
Student
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 37
Originally Posted by Apollo20 View Post
The explosion of the Unit 4 reactor of the 4000 MW Chernobyl nuclear power station, just outside Kiev in Soviet-controlled Ukraine, on April 26 1986, was probably the result of still highly classified U.S. subterfuge.
No, it was the result of poor operator training, poor management, a risky test, a dangerous reactor design, and operator error. The Soviets didn't believe it was external action, so why should you?

Quote:
Covert U.S. action was undertaken because it was deemed a matter of extreme urgency to knockout the high intensity extremely low frequency (ELF) signal emanating from the Gomel “steel yard” array, a large radar transmitter located just north of, and powered by, the ill-fated Chernobyl nuclear power station. The high-energy microwave beam emanating from Gomel was also known as the “woodpecker signal” and was aimed at selected targets in the U.S.; it was a development of the early ELF beams first used by the Soviets against the US embassy in Moscow in 1962.
You do know that ELF and microwave are very different signals, don't you? Extremely low frequency means the wavelength is very long. Microwave means the wavelength is very short. Which is it?

(In other words, you just proved you don't know jack about EM signals.)

By the way, if I am ever "targeted" by an ELF emitter, I will do.... precisely nothing. ELF isn't effective at transmitting energy to objects substantially shorter than the wavelength of the signal, simply because such objects don't make good antennas for picking it up. Oh, and I put "targeted" in scare quotes because it's a bit difficult to aim ELF transmitters.

Quote:
In the late 1970s the woodpecker signal was reported to have produced low-level effects at locations in the US northwest such as Eugene Oregon.
Mmmhmmm. Sure it did.

Quote:
However, by 1985, the woodpecker signal was being used by the Soviets for far more significant and destructive purposes.
Get out the tinfoil!

Quote:
Declassified CIA reports, prepared in late 1983 as background material for Reagan’s SDI announcement, recognized the Soviet’s pre-existing DEW capabilities:

“The Soviets has had a large, military sponsored, high-energy laser weapon program since the 1960s. One of the primary motivations for this effort is probably the development of ballistic missile defense weapons. Our best evidence in this area concerns a major program to develop the technology necessary for a ground-based laser weapon for terminal ballistic missile defense. The results of these longstanding and well-funded programs is that the Soviets are now on a par, or lead, the United States in most of the directed energy weapons technologies.”
LASERS, silly. LASERS. Much higher frequency EMR than even microwave!

Quote:
This admission by the CIA that the Soviets were possibly leading the race for sophisticated and highly destructive “beam” weapons is underscored by the fact that an entire armada of such weapons was in fact deployed by the Soviets in May 1985. Worse yet, these weapons were “field tested” with devastating effectiveness on a number of U.S. targets in the period November 1985 to April 1986.
Prove it. What got blown up? Who died? What reason do we have to believe that any broken equipment or dead people from that time got hit by a laser?

Quote:
The destruction of the Chernobyl Unit 4 reactor on April 26 1986 was the US response…….
This is a total lie. Nobody drilled a hole into Chernobyl with a laser, or aimed a microwave beam weapon at it. There is no way the U.S. could have possibly had such assets on the scene (and yes, Virginia, you do need line of sight if you're going to transmit sufficient power into a target to destroy anything). But more importantly, we know what caused the accident, and it was clearly an internal accident. There is no need to speculate about external energy sources. The plant's own nuclear fuel provided all the energy needed to explain every event which occurred, and the postmortem analysis by the Soviets revealed the sequence of operator errors which allowed that energy to be released in such an uncontrolled fashion.
__________________
In the first place God made idiots. This was for practice. Then he made School Boards. -Mark Twain

Last edited by Aerich; 24th January 2008 at 04:25 PM.
Aerich is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th January 2008, 04:44 PM   #24
ktesibios
Worthless Aging Hippie
 
ktesibios's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,493
Originally Posted by Norseman View Post
I think Apollo20 is trying to pull our legs again:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Woodpecker
Very likely. I think that even a chemist, as opposed to an EE, can reasonably be expected to know that a carrier frequency in the midle of the HF band is neither "microwave" nor "ELF".

Dude's got some talent. I wonder if the paranoid conspiracy theory industry is hiring any writers.
__________________
Ship me somewheres east of Suez, where the best is like the worst, where there ain't no ten commandments and a man can raise a small, bristly mustache.
ktesibios is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th January 2008, 05:22 PM   #25
Apollo20
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,425
You ask for evidence? The known events are the evidence. The details are not in the public domain... obviously!

Oh, and by the way, I never said the US used fancy beam technology to take out Chernobyl. Where did I specify how the deed was done?

The fact remains that Chernobyl has never been properly explained. Even the IAEA withdrew its original report on the event and substituted a new version.
Apollo20 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th January 2008, 05:28 PM   #26
twinstead
Penultimate Amazing
 
twinstead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 12,374
Originally Posted by Apollo20 View Post
Twinstead:

Oh the old argument from incredulity line....
Yes. I didn't say it's not true because I don't believe it, I said I was simply dubious. This implies that I reserve judgment until I see some evidence.

That statement was almost crying out to be recognized as an argument from incredulity and treated as such. Exactly what do you think I meant?
__________________
You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your INFORMED opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant. -- Harlan Ellison
twinstead is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th January 2008, 06:19 PM   #27
Aerich
Student
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 37
Originally Posted by Apollo20 View Post
You ask for evidence?
Yep.

Quote:
The known events are the evidence.
What known events are there?

Note that as someone else pointed out, the "Woodpecker" signal was an early warning radar system which used reflections off the ionosphere to look over the horizon. (I would like to mention here that the frequencies used for Woodpecker were neither ELF nor microwave.) Since the frequencies were also used for radio communications in other countries, it naturally generated some interference as a side effect of its operation. However, it cannot be portrayed as anything more than a defensive radar system, one part of the vast nuclear strike/counterstrike infrastructure built up by both the USA and USSR. It wasn't some kind of imaginary death ray.

Quote:
The details are not in the public domain... obviously!
And thus the waffling begins. No details will ever be supplied, because of course none exist.

But I don't even need details to be interested. What incidents can you point to which you think are evidence that the Soviets used directed energy weapons against the US? You don't need to provide details just yet. I want to see any evidence at all.

Quote:
Oh, and by the way, I never said the US used fancy beam technology to take out Chernobyl. Where did I specify how the deed was done?
You are right, you didn't specify. I assumed you were inventing a fantasy directed energy weapon war.

Quote:
The fact remains that Chernobyl has never been properly explained.
The fact remains that you cannot make this assertion true by repeating it.

Quote:
Even the IAEA withdrew its original report on the event and substituted a new version.
This proves what, exactly? The IAEA felt it had produced an adequate explanation after it published the revision. And, so far as I can tell by cursory internet searching, the second version of the report merely added information concerning the basic safety issues with the reactor's design. The original report had focused on the most immediate cause of the accident, poorly trained operators executing an ill-thought-out test.

Accidents have multiple causes, and when significant consequences are at stake (such as the future behavior of the nuclear power industry), responsible investigations try to identify all contributing factors rather than just stopping at the most immediate and obvious problem. Fixing an omission in a report does not mean the accident has not been explained.
__________________
In the first place God made idiots. This was for practice. Then he made School Boards. -Mark Twain
Aerich is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th January 2008, 06:52 PM   #28
Apollo20
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,425
Aerich:

Consider how the Chernobyl "accident" is supposed to have happened:

RBMK-1000 reactors are known to have a positive reactivity coefficient in the event of voiding of the coolant, but so do CANDU reactors.

There was no reason for the very rapid voiding during the simple reduced coolant flow situation created as part of the planned generator coast-down test of Chernobyl Unit 4 on April 26, 1986. Furthermore, there were TWO reactor excursions when only one is predicted from a rapid vaporization of the coolant.....

Too bad they had to blame the "accident" on the operators!
Apollo20 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th January 2008, 07:16 PM   #29
OldTigerCub
Striped Shapeshifting Reptoid
 
OldTigerCub's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,619
Originally Posted by Corsair 115 View Post
So what are the Japanese terrorists going to do in revenge for Nagasaki?
Design and market compact cars that no average sized American can drive more than 25 miles without getting leg cramps?
Oh....they did that already....
__________________
"Nuts!" - General Anthony C. McAuliffe
OldTigerCub is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th January 2008, 08:04 PM   #30
gtc
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 7,110
Originally Posted by phunk View Post
How do you aim a microwave beam over the horizon?
Place a layer of corn chips in a microwave safe bowl, add salsa and cover in grated cheese.. Place the bowl in the microwave and cook on full power until the cheese starts to bubble.

Oh wait, that's how you make microwave nachos.
gtc is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th January 2008, 08:24 PM   #31
Cl1mh4224rd
Philosopher
 
Cl1mh4224rd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,778
Quote:
And, according to his website, so does the fact that Katrina and Ivan — the name given to a destructive hurricane that hit Florida in September 2004 — both sound Russian.

That reminds me of an amusing observation someone made while I worked for Sony Electronics, at one of their TV production plants, when our particular part of the plant was working on the WEGA branded sets: "A Japanese television, with a German name, made by Americans."

It's nice to give a nod to the originators of the technology, but when you're trying to carry out a super-secret weather war, it seems kind of... retarded.
Cl1mh4224rd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th January 2008, 09:01 PM   #32
1337m4n
Alphanumeric Anonymous Stick Man
 
1337m4n's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 3,510
Originally Posted by Apollo20 View Post
The fact remains that Chernobyl has never been properly explained. Even the IAEA withdrew its original report on the event and substituted a new version.
Therefore, it was destroyed by a secret Soviet weather control device? I'm still trying to figure out what anything you've said has to do with the topic of this thread. Please link the things you have said to the topic at hand.
1337m4n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th January 2008, 09:03 PM   #33
1337m4n
Alphanumeric Anonymous Stick Man
 
1337m4n's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 3,510
Originally Posted by Apollo20 View Post
Aerich:

Consider how the Chernobyl "accident" is supposed to have happened:

RBMK-1000 reactors are known to have a positive reactivity coefficient in the event of voiding of the coolant, but so do CANDU reactors.

There was no reason for the very rapid voiding during the simple reduced coolant flow situation created as part of the planned generator coast-down test of Chernobyl Unit 4 on April 26, 1986. Furthermore, there were TWO reactor excursions when only one is predicted from a rapid vaporization of the coolant.....

Too bad they had to blame the "accident" on the operators!
Wow. Not only are you an expert in controlled demolitions, but you're also an expert in nuclear reactor design!

We continue to be astounded by your incredible knowledge of all fields, Apollo20.




I'm willing to bet you don't even know what "positive reactivity coefficient" means.

Last edited by 1337m4n; 24th January 2008 at 09:05 PM.
1337m4n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th January 2008, 11:54 PM   #34
uk_dave
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 8,154
Originally Posted by Apollo20 View Post

Too bad they had to blame the "accident" on the operators!
Why is it that whenever something major happens and the NWO have to cover it up, they either choose a cover story which is only obviously fake to adolescent amateur sleuths on the internet, or they go for a story which can only be seen as false by a lone expert?

See a pattern emerging?
uk_dave is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th January 2008, 12:03 AM   #35
Brainache
Nasty Brutish and Tall
 
Brainache's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Canberra
Posts: 17,473
You may scoff UK Dave, but Apollo20 is a genius! People scoffed at Galileo when he invented pennicillin, but he proved them wrong, just like Frank will!
Brainache is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th January 2008, 01:44 AM   #36
portlandatheist
Illuminator
 
portlandatheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,706
Originally Posted by Safe-Keeper View Post
PS: Why do all conspiracy theory statements have the same writing style? It's as if it's the same lonely guy making all of them up.
I think you're on to something here. Obviously, this is no coincidence or happenstance. These conspiracy theories are all developed by the same central super secret world organization to be spread to their minions, or maybe it is one lonely guy in a basement somewhere.
portlandatheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th January 2008, 03:12 AM   #37
Alareth
Philosopher
 
Alareth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 7,682
Originally Posted by Brainache View Post
You may scoff UK Dave, but Apollo20 is a genius! People scoffed at Galileo when he invented pennicillin, but he proved them wrong, just like Frank will!

I thought Galileo was a composite entity created as an amalgam of every famous person in history.

He told us so in this very forum.
Alareth is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th January 2008, 09:29 PM   #38
Aerich
Student
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 37
Originally Posted by Apollo20 View Post
Aerich:

Consider how the Chernobyl "accident" is supposed to have happened:

RBMK-1000 reactors are known to have a positive reactivity coefficient in the event of voiding of the coolant, but so do CANDU reactors.

There was no reason for the very rapid voiding during the simple reduced coolant flow situation created as part of the planned generator coast-down test of Chernobyl Unit 4 on April 26, 1986.
On the contrary, there was a very good reason for the rapid voiding: the crew put the reactor into an unstable low-power state which was highly susceptible to a runaway reaction, then did something which initiated a runaway reaction.

During the process of reducing power output to 0.7-1.0GW for the test, the crew unknowingly caused the reactor to generate lots of Xenon-135 fission byproduct (a neutron absorber which 'poisons' the reaction). This dropped power output to 30MW, insufficient to run the test. The crew apparently didn't realize what had happened and tried to compensate for the unexpectedly low output by retracting control rods. Even after using safety overrides to retract more rods than normally allowed, the reactor only achieved about 200MW output. They decided to run the experiment anyways.

At this point, the reactor was in a very dangerous state. With few or no control rods inserted, its reaction rate was kept in check mainly by Xenon-135 and the lesser neutron absorption rate of the light water coolant. There were no other neutron absorbing materials in place to limit reaction rate once the Xenon-135 was consumed.

The experiment worsened the situation, causing a power spike which burned some of the Xenon-135 and turned some of the coolant to steam, both of which reduced the amount of neutron absorption. But that wasn't quite enough to cause the explosion. It wasn't until the operators pressed the SCRAM button (*) to shut the reactor down that catastrophic things happened. The SCRAM caused control rods to be lowered back into the reactor, but a RBMK design flaw meant that the initial behavior of the reactor while lowering a fully retracted rod was actually a power spike. RBMK control rods had graphite tips. Graphite is a good neutron moderator (neutron moderators enhance reaction rate), and the mechanism which lowered the rods was slow, so the tips had plenty of time to both displace some water (which was some of the only remaining protection against a runaway reaction) and directly increase reaction rate (by slowing fast neutrons) before the section of the rods containing neutron absorbers could descend into the core.

Lowering many rods simultaneously thus caused a very sudden runaway reaction when the graphite tips began to enter the core, 30GW output just a few seconds after the SCRAM was initiated. The intense heat quickly caused enough damage to jam the control rods, preventing them from descending far enough to stop the reaction. Very shortly thereafter the reactor built up enough steam pressure to blow the lid of the pressure vessel, all the coolant was vented in the ensuing steam explosion, and that was that.


(*) It's not actually known whether this was a panic move. The reactor was supposed to be taken completely offline after the test, the test had completed, and lowering all control rods via a scram is how you'd shut it down. The operators all died, so all we know is the sequence of control inputs and telemetry recorded and recovered during the investigation.
__________________
In the first place God made idiots. This was for practice. Then he made School Boards. -Mark Twain
Aerich is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th January 2008, 10:08 PM   #39
gumboot
lorcutus.tolere
 
gumboot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 25,327
Originally Posted by Apollo20 View Post
Phunk:

Have you never heard of over the horizon radar?


Surely you're aware that OTH radars only function due to the backscatter characteristic of very high frequency radio waves? You claimed this device was not just low frequency, but extremely low frequency (okay, you also said it was a microwave, hey, we'll treat that as an honest (if stupid) mistake). If the device is functioning at extremely low frequency it does not produce the backscatter necessary for over the horizon operation.

Simply put, you have no idea whatsoever what you're talking about, and are doing nothing more than dumping language-vomit on our screens. Wipe yourself up and go play with your test tubes, doctor.
__________________

O xein', angellein Lakedaimoniois hoti têde
keimetha tois keinon rhémasi peithomenoi.


A fan of fantasy? Check out Project Dreamforge.
gumboot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th January 2008, 01:25 PM   #40
Panhead56
Scholar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 54
So many wrongs.. where to begin?

Originally Posted by Apollo20 View Post
You ask for evidence? The known events are the evidence. The details are not in the public domain... obviously!

Oh, and by the way, I never said the US used fancy beam technology to take out Chernobyl. Where did I specify how the deed was done?

The fact remains that Chernobyl has never been properly explained. Even the IAEA withdrew its original report on the event and substituted a new version.
The Tsjernobyl/Chernobyl accident is very much in the public domain. And have been studied and evalueated repeatedly since 1986, at least here in Europe where we are still concerned by the continued operation of similar reactors in former east-bloc countries, such as the two RBMK-1500 reactors of the Ignalina plant in Lithuania.

The IAEA (a UN-body) have a full web-page dedicated to the accident where you can read and watch until your eyes are sore at http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Focus/Chernobyl/.
Also at Nuclear Energy Agency-NEA (a OECD body) you can read a full report at http://www.nea.fr/html/rp/chernobyl/welcome.html. And you may even try some non governmetal organisations, like this one (Norwegian Bellona) where you even can read about secret (gosh!) KGB-files now declassified at http://www.bellona.org/subjects/Atom
And the IAEA did not "withdraw" it report. It is UPDATED. Mainly with new figures relating to the long term radiation effects on health. (How many have developed cancers etc.).
The Tsjernobyl accidents remains a popular topic for all professions concerned with safety and risk management, such as myself. The reason it beeing such a "perfect" case-studie, containing as posted elsewhere in this thread, a real mix of poor-design, poor quality of build, bad maintenance, bad procedures, lack of proper training and competence, etc etc.
And by the way, the accident was NOT caused by some secret weapon. Only a well known combination of ineptitude and bad jugdement.

Last edited by Panhead56; 26th January 2008 at 03:03 PM. Reason: It has of course been studied since 1986, not 1996 as first written
Panhead56 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:26 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.