Cosmic Warfare


These stories were sent to me by many of you - Ms. P.H., Mr. G.B. and many others - and they're quite interesting, if, that is, you're like me and you think there's a heck of a lot more going on with the ionospheric heaters, HAARP and EISCAT and so on, than the governments running them are willing to admit publicly. Consider these two articles very carefully:

Vacancy: Arctic PhD Studentship in Vertical Atmospheric Coupling

NRL Scientists Produce Densest Artificial Ionospheric Plasma Clouds Using HAARP

Now I want to draw your attention to two sets of statements, one set from the first article, and one set from the second.  Consider the implications of these statements from the first article, and its advertisement of a PhD vacancy program for Europe's EISCAT:

"Gravity waves (atmospheric buoyancy waves) are a highly important means of transporting energy from the lower to the upper atmosphere and so potentially very important for understanding climate variability, yet due to their scale sizes they are not resolved in global circulation models. In the troposphere gravity waves are generated by sources such as air-flow over the mountains or large convective storms and can be commonly spotted as ripples in the clouds. Breaking of waves in the mesosphere (~50-90 km altitude) drives the pole-to pole circulation that links the cold summer mesopause and the strong down-welling that occurs in the polar vortex in the winter hemisphere.... WACCM (Whole Atmosphere Coupled Community Model) simulations have suggested that a change in the altitude of gravity wave breaking effects the peak meridional circulation, the vertical transport of important chemical constituents and their mixing ratios. Gravity waves that penetrate into the thermosphere influence the density of ionosphere and may have an upward impact on geomagnetic storms and the resultant space weather effects. Other sources of gravity waves in middle and upper atmosphere in the Polar Regions are the polar vortex itself and the geomagnetic activity. (Emphasis added)

The implications here seem rather obvious, if not enormous. First, if changes in the altitude of gravity wave breaking effect circulation, then one might generalize from this statement that gravity, like other forces, exists in an ever-changing complex dynamic; as the structure of the systems changes, so does its structure. This kind of dynamic view of things might best be summed up in the phrase "dynamic torsion". Second, it is to be noted that, as a kind of backhand confession en passant as it were, EISCAT is admitting that one of the purposes of the antenna array is for the study of gravity and gravitational dynamics within complex systems... like Earth and nearby space weather. Or to put it differently, these subtle gravitational changes within the dynamic system effect weather; gravity and weather are related.

Now with these thoughts in mind, let's look at the second set of statements from the second article:

"U.S. Naval Research Laboratory research physicists and engineers from the Plasma Physics Division, working at the High-frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP) transmitter facility, Gakona, Alaska, successfully produced a sustained high density plasma cloud in Earth's upper atmosphere.

"'Previous artificial plasma density clouds have lifetimes of only ten minutes or less,' said Paul Bernhardt, Ph.D., NRL Space Use and Plasma Section. 'This higher density plasma 'ball' was sustained over one hour by the HAARP transmissions and was extinguished only after termination of the HAARP radio beam.'

"These glow discharges in the upper atmosphere were generated as a part of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) sponsored Basic Research on Ionospheric Characteristics and Effects (BRIOCHE) campaign to explore ionospheric phenomena and its impact on communications and space weather."

Now, for those that missed it, this means that HAARP (and by implication, any other such ionospheric heater, such as EISCAT), can create and sustain a plasma at various altitudes and, if the first set of statements be recalled, thus influence gravity wave breaking and thus the dynamics - including weather and space weather of the overall dynamic system.

Think about that...

And we'll see you on more thing. Just remember, this is what they're telling us. Just imagine what they're not telling us.

Ok. Now I'm done. See you on the flip side.


  1. I claim no knowledge about these matters . . . .

    First of all, I cannot believe they are using the phrase “gravity waves” here.

    They simply MUST be using that phrase in a different way from mainstream physicists (which would be a really nasty thing to do). Otherwise, why haven’t we heard of the recent nobel prize(s) for the DISCOVERY of “gravity waves,” which, as everyone knows, have not been discovered yet (officially) by the physics/astronomy establishment. If LIGO had discovered gravity waves, I don’t think they’d ever stop reminding us of the “fact.”

    Secondly, regarding “. . . . to explore ionospheric phenomena and its impact on communications and space weather.”, well, I just have to wonder, whenever HAARP is mentioned, what IMPACT “ionospheric HEATERS” might have on GLOBAL WARMING. You know, just for fun . . . .

    1. Its because bdw000 they are not talking about “gravity”. This is not gravity research, its atmospheric research so Dr Farrell has read it completely wrongly lol. Gravity is involved I suppose in a very tangential way but the waves in this case are waves in the atmosphere. The waves are ripples in the atmosphere and not in the gravitational field of the earth or the “space-time continuum” or “aether” etc. The waves are like those dropped into water but in this case its the atmosphere. And of course the atmosphere is made up of various gases and water vapour, and as it can act like a fluid, ripples of various kinds can be created.

      Here is a link to a site with some pics of “gravity waves”.

      The second article about plasma I think is more interesting. These plasma clouds could I suppose be seen (if they are that luminous) as ufos to observers on the ground maybe (?), and if they could be moved … ???

      I suppose also, if they could be produced at a certain place at will, they could do damage to whatever it is they have been created in or around. Plasma is hot nasty stuff. How big these plasma clouds are they don’t say but its possible that they could be weaponised, I would think if the plasma could be concentrated enough in one place. Goodbye legs, body etc …

      Anyway, I’m was rather surprised that Dr Farrell read the first article wrongly though, and I think he should have to at least have a 100 lines, and possibly should be kept back after school!!!

      Best wishes

      Harvey Price

      1. paraschtick:

        Good call, though some of those photos look like what Tom Bearden would call evidence of weather engineering.

        I too thought it odd there’d be such a public claim, ie and accepted, claim of coupling electricity and gravity.

  2. Yes Wihelm Reich that was over fifty going on sixty years ago. One wonders how far they have advance since then. I shutter to think what nasty purpose they will but this technology too.

    1. It’s not just how Reich’s own work may have been developed, but the fact that by his own devices between 75 and 56 years ago, he managed to develop was was only being done in very secret corners of science back then, eg clearly radioactive material’s don’t necessarily decay at a fixed rate; that’s Reich coming to a conclusion similar to that of Le Bon.

      Granted we could discover more efficient ways of destroying ourselves, but we’ve wasted at least 120 years living by the limitation of noether, not to be confused with Noether.

  3. I’ve always found it hard to believe in the so-called ignorance of gravity. Even the “graviton” is a mythical particle; and at the same time, massless. Yet, in exotic energies it is essential. It certainly looks like a cloak of ignorance/invisibilty has been cast over gravity.
    Add to the “DEEP” Peter Dale Scott nomenclatures,
    “Deep Gravity”.

    1. There are many folks who think that Einsteinian relativity is the “cloak of ignorance over gravity” that you mention.

      As far as I’m concerned (and I am definitely no expert here, but . . .), the Catholic church has more evidence for their claims than mainstream physics has for “relativity.” Nothing but a pack of lies.

  4. That EISCAT job posting sure suggests a different understanding of gravity than is usually publicly acknowledged. And sure suggests that this other understanding is at least confirmed by other research someone with an advanced degree in applying for this job would have read.

    Suspiciously like Wilhelm Reich’s work.

Comments are closed.