It is a cheap method to psychiatrize people with the term "Conspiracy Theories". It is strange that "Science" - as a central societal belief-complex - is media-hype made to play God (something that is connected to psychiatry as some people feel like "God" or the like) by avoiding the discussion with their critics through psychiatrization of these same critics. A known Soviet method!
Nevertheless, it has not to be the other way around. The critics don't psychiatrize the people behind the madness of scientifically worked-out results: they make them accountable.
Wikipedia:
"HAARP is the subject of numerous conspiracy theories. Various individuals have speculated about hidden motives and capabilities of the project. For example, Rosalie Bertell warned in 1996 about the deployment of HAARP as a military weapon.[31] Michel Chossudovsky stated in a book published by the Committee on Monetary and Economic Reform that 'recent scientific evidence suggests that HAARP is fully operational and has the capability of triggering floods, hurricanes, droughts and earthquakes.'[32] Over time, HAARP has been blamed for generating such catastrophes, as well as thunderstorms, in Iran, Pakistan, Haiti, Turkey, Greece and the Philippines, and even major power outages, the downing of TWA Flight 800, Gulf War syndrome, and chronic fatigue syndrome.[6][33][34]
Allegations include the following:
Nick Begich Jr., the son of the late U.S. Representative Nick Begich and brother of former U.S. Senator Mark Begich, is the author of Angels Don't Play This HAARP. He has claimed that HAARP could trigger earthquakes and turn the upper atmosphere into a giant lens so that 'the sky would literally appear to burn.' He maintains a website that claims HAARP is a mind control device.[35][36]
A Russian military journal wrote that ionospheric testing would 'trigger a cascade of electrons that could flip Earth's magnetic poles'.[35]
The Alaska state legislature and the European Parliament held hearings about HAARP, the latter citing environmental concerns.[37]
Former Governor of Minnesota, ex-professional wrestler, and conspiracy theorist Jesse Ventura questioned whether the government is using the site to manipulate the weather or to bombard people with mind-controlling radio waves. An Air Force spokeswoman said Ventura made an official request to visit the research station but was rejected . 'He and his crew showed up at HAARP anyway and were denied access.'[38]
Physicist Bernard Eastlund claimed that HAARP includes technology based on his own patents that has the capability to modify weather and neutralize satellites.[5]
It has been proposed as a cause of low frequency background hums said to be heard in various locales.[39]
Two Georgia men arrested on drug charges in November 2016 were reportedly plotting domestic terrorism based on conspiracy theories about HAARP. The Coffee County Sheriff's Office say the men possessed a 'massive arsenal' that included AR-15 rifles, Glock handguns, a Remington rifle and thousands of rounds of ammunition. According to police, the men wanted to destroy HAARP because they believed the facility manipulates the weather, controls minds and even traps the souls of people. Police say the men confessed that 'God told them to go and blow this machine up that kept souls, so souls could be released.'[40][41]
Stanford University professor Umran Inan told Popular Science that weather-control conspiracy theories were 'completely uninformed,' explaining that "there's absolutely nothing we can do to disturb the Earth's [weather] systems. Even though the power HAARP radiates is very large, it's minuscule compared with the power of a lightning flash—and there are 50 to 100 lightning flashes every second. HAARP's intensity is very small.'[5] Computer scientist David Naiditch characterizes HAARP as 'a magnet for conspiracy theorists', saying that HAARP attracts their attention because, 'its purpose seems deeply mysterious to the scientifically uninformed.'[6] Journalist Sharon Weinberger called HAARP 'the Moby Dick of conspiracy theories,' and said the popularity of conspiracy theories often overshadows the benefits HAARP may provide to the scientific community.[42][43] Austin Baird writing in the Alaska Dispatch said, 'What makes HAARP susceptible to conspiracy criticism is simple. The facility doesn't open its doors in the same way as other federally-funded research facilities around the country, and it doesn't go to great efforts to explain the importance of its research to the public.'[33] In August 2016, in response to these claims, the facility announced it would have an open day, allowing visitors to tour the complex.[44]
Notes 31 till 44:
Rosalie Bertell, Background on the HAARP Project. Global Policy Forum, 5 November 1996
Michel Chossudovsky, Climate Manipulation as a War Weapon, p181-182. In William Krehm,Meltdown : Money, Debt and Wealth of Nations : how Zero Inflation Policy is Leading the World's Monetary and Economic Systems to Collapse : an Anthology from the First Decade of Economic Reform], COMER Publications, 1 January 1999
a b Baird, Austin (20 September 2011). 'HAARP conspiracies: Guide to most far-out theories behind government research in Alaska'. Alaska Dispatch. Retrieved 8 December 2012.
Flock, Elizabeth (29 October 2012). 'Conspiracy Theorists Say Obama Engineered Hurricane Sandy'. US News & World Report. Retrieved 8 December 2012.
a b Shachtman, Noah (20 July 2009). 'Strange New Air Force Facility Energizes Ionosphere, Fans Conspiracy Flames'. Wired Magazine. Retrieved 17 April 2011.
'About us - Dr. Nick Begich'. Retrieved 2 June 2011.
'EU clashes with US over atmosphere tests'. physicsworld.com. IOP Publishing, 27 February 1998. Retrieved 17 April 2011.
Baenen, Jeff. 'Ventura seeks out conspiracy theories at Alaska statio'. Juneau Empire. Retrieved 17 October 2011.
Josh Clark and Charles W. 'Chuck' Bryant (December 9, 2014). 'How The Hum Works'. Stuff You Should Know (Podcast). Blucora. Retrieved 2014-12-10.
Zak, Annie. 'Georgia men plotted attack on Alaska aurora research facility to "release souls," detective says'. ADN.com. Alaska Dispatch News. Retrieved 2 January 2017.
Buckets, Re-Essa. 'Suspected terrorists believe research facility controls minds, traps souls'. WALB.com. WALB news. Retrieved 2 January 2017.
Weinberger, Sharon (23 April 2008). 'Atmospheric physics: Heating up the heavens'. Nature. Retrieved 21 January 2010.
Weinberger, Sharon (25 April 2008). 'The Strange Life and Times of HAARP'. Wired Magazine. Retrieved 21 January 2010.
http://www.adn.com/alaska-news/scie...facility-is-not-capable-of-mind-control/"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Frequency_Active_Auroral_Research_ProgramUnfortunately, there is no concrete note reference in "Wired" to this citation:
"A Russian military journal wrote that ionospheric testing would 'trigger a cascade of electrons that could flip Earth's magnetic poles'.[35]"
I could find a Russian military journal in:
http://nagolovu-voenny.livejournal.comBut they do not have any mentioning to a "ionospheric testing" which would "trigger a cascade of electrons that could flip Earth's magnetic poles".
"Wired" acknowledges such a citation:
"A Russian military journal warned that blasting the ionosphere would trigger a cascade of electrons that could flip Earth's magnetic poles. 'Simply speaking, the planet will "capsize,"' it warned."
https://www.wired.com/2009/07/mf-haarp/Obviously "Wired" refers to the book of Nick Begich (
http://www.alachuacounty.us/Depts/e...%20HAARP%20by%20Nick%20Begich%201997.pdf )
Nick Begich; Jeane Manning
Angels don't play this HAARP : advances in Tesla technology
Anchorage, Alaska : Earthpulse Press, 2007, ©2002.
http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/809233685On page 64 of his 1997-edition book Begich states:
"Russian scientists are also concerned that continued increases in electromagnetic radiations could contribute to a premature and cataclysmic reversal or position shift of Earth‘s poles." (1997 edition)
Also in Begich's book is no reference made on where he got this information from. He has no literature offered at the end of his book. Out of the context of Begich's book it is obvious that he refers to a Soviet source. The Soviets were pretty advanced in that field.
That way it is clarified that the orginal information does not come from a Russian military journal as it is spread by many internet sources.
The original information comes from the Soviet times before 1992.
Joseph P. Farrell, PhD. of Oxford, also tries to find the original information in his article "OLD NEWS IS SOMETIMES NEW NEWS: RUSSIAN WARNING ABOUT HAARP" (
https://gizadeathstar.com/2011/03/old-news-is-sometimes-new-news-russian-warning-about-haarp/ ) stating: "Looking at the footnote for this quotation, I could not find what Russian military journal was being referred to, nor the title of the presumed paper nor its author."
He states further in his article:
"Later we learn that one possible source for the Russian article is its Northern Fleet report, which maintains that the US has plans to destroy Iran via targeted earthquakes. "
That way we still don't get the real source of information as there is no "Northern Fleet report" available in the libraries. (
http://cw3xq8qy9r.search.serialssol...#/?language=en-US&titleType=JOURNALS ) An internal not-published "Northern Fleet report" of the British Ministry of Defence is of no value for the public discussion of HAARP. It would be put in the "Conspiracy" corner.
Despite of this missing information link which may be filled in by Begich it is obvious that the HAARP technology can be used for other purposes than the ones declared in the Wikipedia-article.
In the array of nuclear technology it has been publicly confirmed and is well-established since the Atoms for Peace program of 1953 by U.S. President Eisenhower that this specific technology is a dual-use-technology. (
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual-use_technology )
In other areas such as the production of material for explosives there has been a dual-use-possibilty since the First World War as the German exportation of factories for the production of fertilizer to the Saddam's Iraq had shown.
The scientific methods to work out results may be objective but Science herself is as subjective as every human being is. Science is as good or as bad as the people working in Science.
The reason why I did this research was that there are many, many internet sources refering to the researched quotation - such as:
http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/column.php?id=206801https://skywatchmarl.wordpress.com/tag/erdbebenwaffe/
