Haarp on, haarp off

Mark Baker of Chemtrails over NZ reports…

But haarpstatus.com (also on facebook) currently shows the following readings for Australia/NZ…

In other words, it would appear we’re not registering any HAARP activity at all.

As Mark Knopfler of Dire Straits once sang: “Two men say they’re Jesus, one of them must be wrong”.

Who, I wonder, is wrong in this situation?

 

 

 

HAARPed chemcloud v. Cirrocumulus / Altocumulus (mackerel sky)

On the left, a HAARPed cloud, as identified by Ray Foxley of the Chemtrails over NZ facebook group. On the right, a drawing of cirrocumulus, above some altocumulus, from Researches about atmospheric phaenomena (1815). Both types of cumulus cloud are sometimes referred to as ‘mackerel sky‘. Google image search also has lots of good examples of cirrocumulus, altocumulus and mackerel sky.

Haarp? or Alto/cirrocumulus?

Learn the difference!

Global Increase in Earthquakes since the formation of Creed

According to research unearthed by Clare, there’s apparently been an upswing in ‘Worldwide Deadly & Destructive Earthquakes’  since 1995, ‘around’ the same year HAARP was created. (And the same year rock band Creed started performing. Coincidence? Very unlikely!)

Now, there’s a few problems with this statement…

1. The HAARP program began in 1990. The first, relatively low-powered 360kw prototype was completed in 1994, which was upgraded to 960kw in 1998. It wasn’t until 2007 until the full-powered 3600kw IRI array went into operation.
2.  The graph which underpins the source of this claim originally comes from this article (click here to see the graph) (and thanks JtP, for finding it), which isn’t about HAARP at all, but instead states the increase in quake activity is down to various ancient civilizations’ end-of-world prophecies.
3. The numbers from that graph are sourced from a USGS list of  “Selected earthquakes of general historic interest“. So, it’s not a precise list of the numbers of actual earthquakes, just a manually created list of notable events of subjective interest to the general public. And, to that end, there are more quakes listed more recently, as they are of genuine interest right now. I’m sure that in 50 years, a 3.5M quake in Northern California wouldn’t make that list, but, as of now, there it is.
4. And if we look at the number of  actual 6.0M+ quakes over the last few decades, what do we find? Using the USGS/NEIC (PDE) database, we can search for all 6.0M+ quakes, worldwide, since 1973. So, side-by-side, how do they measure up….

I’ve indicated the comparison period with a line and arrow in the first graph. As you can see, while there has been a general trend up in the number of 6.0M magnitude earthquakes, it’s nowhere near as significant as the first graph would lead you to believe (you’ll also notice that a very small minority of quakes even make it onto that ‘general historical interest’ list — just going to show how arbitrary it is). And as the USGS itself point out…

… improved global communication and enhancements in detection technology have both contributed to higher earthquake numbers being recorded over time … “Although it may seem that we are having more earthquakes, earthquakes of magnitude 7.0 or greater have remained fairly constant throughout this century and, according to our records, have actually seemed to decrease in recent years.” [emphasis added]

Which just makes me think I should have drawn up a graph for 7.0M+ earthquakes. C’est la vie.