Originally posted by sonhouse
http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,2104251,00.html?hpt=hp_t3

I wondered why they have had 19 failures so far🙂

They are of course ignoring the most basic laws of economics. If the US wanted to sabotage a Russian rocket, it would be easier to corrupt one of the scientists/engineers involved in the launch than to bring down the rocket via some futuristic magnetic pulse device.

Originally posted by sonhouse
http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,2104251,00.html?hpt=hp_t3

I wondered why they have had 19 failures so far🙂

The Empire doesn't have that kind of capability.

But the Martians do.

Originally posted by Soothfast
The Empire doesn't have that kind of capability.

But the Martians do.

So the conclusion is Martians don't like communists? or Russians? And they love Americans......

Originally posted by sonhouse
http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,2104251,00.html?hpt=hp_t3

I wondered why they have had 19 failures so far🙂

All I can say is, the tone of that article does rather suggest that the Russians might have a point.

There used to be a time when Time employed journalists. Apparently no more. What a rotten bit of tendentious, self-ingratiating propaganda. I hope the USA is proud of such "writers".

Richard

Originally posted by Shallow Blue
All I can say is, the tone of that article does rather suggest that the Russians might have a point.

There used to be a time when Time employed journalists. Apparently no more. What a rotten bit of tendentious, self-ingratiating propaganda. I hope the USA is proud of such "writers".

Richard

I would think the Russians, confronted with aggression like that from the US would counter attack and knock some of our probes out of space. That not happening, it suggests the story is BS or the Russians can't retaliate in kind.

Originally posted by sonhouse
So the conclusion is Martians don't like communists? or Russians? And they love Americans......

Yes, that -- and also that Venusians love Russians.

Because Russia has always had far more luck sending probes to Venus.

But what other explanation is there? I suppose it's possible that the Order of the Illuminati, who control the U.S. government as well as international monetary policy, do not want the Russians to discover their pyramid headquarters on Mars with the Eye of Providence on its top that is aimed at the Kremlin.

Originally posted by sonhouse
http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,2104251,00.html?hpt=hp_t3

I wondered why they have had 19 failures so far🙂

There was a popular right wing conspiracy theory that the Challenger was destroyed by Soviet sabotage.

http://www.ask.com/web?l=dis&o=16134&qsrc=2873&q=Space%20Shuttle%20Challenger%20Soviet%20sabotage

MEG Inventor Tom Bearden: Did the Soviets Cause the Challenger
Disaster?
YOWUSA.COM, May 6, 2002
Janice Manning

On the morning of January 28, 1986, America screamed, shouted and
wept in collective horror as the Space Shuttle Challenger exploded
73 seconds after liftoff, killing all aboard. We later learned
that this tragedy was caused by the weathering and hardening of the
huge, rubber "O" rings that were installed in the solid rocket, but
there could be more to the story. If U.S. Army Colonel (retired)
Tom Bearden is right, there is an even deeper reason than weather
itself – Soviet EM warfare directed against the United States. If
so, this could portend dangerous consequences for America's near
future, vis-à-vis an Axis of Evil state.

The official report on the Challenger disaster stated the "O" rings
had been damaged by unnaturally cold weather. The fact that the
failure of the "O" rings caused the disaster it irrefutably. . . .

U.S. Space Program Challenged

Exactly two months and two days before the Challenger tragedy, the
space shuttle Atlantis lifted off from Cape Canaveral in an evening
launch. During that launch, a strange light was observed in the sky
nearby. Twelve minutes into the flight of the Atlantis, when the
craft was safely downrange, a huge atmospheric rumbling explosion
occurred that was heard for hundreds of miles in all directions.
These booms and rumbles over Florida were becoming commonplace and
Atlantis was the third space shuttle launch to be marked by this
phenomenon.

A mere six weeks before the Challenger disaster occurred, the same
Soviet EM weapon was deliberately tested against "an Arrow DC-8
taking off from Gander Air Force Base, Newfoundland. At lift-off,
the aircraft—carrying over 258 U.S. Marines and aircrew—lost power
and sank into the ground tail-low, killing everyone on board."
Observers of the crash reported hearing the engines of the doomed
craft roaring in painful labor as the plane struggled to right
itself.


On January 1, 1986, the U.S. learned that the Soviets had upgraded
their "Woodpecker" EM weapons systems with a metal softening signal.
The signal had been detected and verified using a special
verification process.

On January 28, 1986, the Challenger disaster occurred. The many
indicators of Soviet tampering are listed here in Bearden's own
words.

The Tom Bearden Website
Historical Background of Scalar EM Weapons
On Jan. 28, 1986 the Challenger disaster occurred. The Challenger
was positively killed by the Soviet Union, using the scalar EM
weapons through the Woodpecker grid. A host of indicators
occurred.

… The anomalous cold weather in Florida was definitely engineered
by the USSR,

… Specialized cloud patterns associated with Soviet grid
engineering and weather engineering were observed and photographed
in Los Angeles, California and Huntsville, Alabama, beginning
several days before the incident, and particularly on the evening
before the launch,

… The normal "pivot point" for turning the jetstream northeastward
was moved south from Huntsville, Alabama to Birmingham, Alabama by
the Soviets; this was to force the jetstream much further south,
and consequently move unusually cold air into the Florida
panhandle, exposing the shuttle to undue cold stress,

… About 4 hours before launch; all Soviet ships off shore suddenly
left the area at speed; this was the first shuttle launch not
"shadowed" by Soviet ships,

… On the morning of the launch, higher frequencies were added to
the interference grid to enable much-enhanced localization. The
brains of small birds are very sensitive to these higher
frequencies, due to their small diameter (wavelength) as a scalar
EM receiver. If they remained in the area of localization, the
birds would be in intense pain or killed. On the morning of the
launch, national TV network news, announcers, noted that no birds
at all were flying in the area, something which had never happened
before.

… At the time of the shuttle's destruction, a giant radial cloud
pattern was actually in the general vicinity;



… Three previous shuttle launches—the last on Nov. 26,1985—had
been used as direct test targets for tests of the Soviet launch
phase ABM/antibomber defense system so the weapon was "zeroed in"
on the launch site,

… The anomalous destruction of the Arrow DC-8 on Dec. 12, 1985 had
already indicated a Soviet decision to elevate the testing to the
actual destruction of targeted vehicles,

… At the time of the launch, anomalous electromagnetic phenomena
occurred in nearby restaurants,

… A metal-softening signal was on the grid, as previously detected
by Golden. This signal would be detected by the launch flame, and
after ignition would result in a steady weakening of the metal in
and around the booster flame. Note that the metal was already
cold-stressed beyond what it had been tested to withstand,

… Almost immediately after ignition, the booster seals vented,
giving evidence that the cold stress and the metal-softening
signal were weakening the system,

… An anomalous 10 second or so burnthrough of the weakened booster
occurred,

… An anomalous "1ight"—possibly a Soviet EM missile —was observed
to play on the rocket before it blew up,

… An anomalous "flat plate" earthquake over about 11 states
occurred within days after destruction of the shuttle. This type
of quake is strongly suspicious, and it was probably the test of
the grid/howitzers in a ground wave interferometry mode,

… Substantial winds and air turbulence over the launch site
increased the stress on the Challenger as it rose through this
region. With a giant cloud radial in the area, one strongly
suspects that the turbulence may have been deliberately created or
augmented by the Soviet scalar EM grid,

… A few days later, from 1-4 February 1986, many birds
inadvertently flew into the new, localized "pivot point" at
Birmingham, Alabama, encountered the high frequency components,
and dead birds fell from the sky in substantial numbers. Many
different kinds of birds were involved.


… Most significant of all, General Daniel Graham has reported
that, on the evening after the death of the Challenger, the Soviet
KGBgave a party and celebrated the success of their perfect active
measures against the Challenger! [emphasis mine -- JM] Note that
all development, deployment, employment, and command and control
of the Soviet scalar EM weapons are under the KGB. Finally, a U.S.
classified investigation of the Challenger disaster was ordered by
Congress, but its results have not been made public. Beyond any
doubt the Soviets destroyed the Challenger, and killed the seven
brave astronauts aboard the spaceship.

Has Tom Bearden established EM weaponry as a scientific fact? Yes,
definitely. If so, will this Cold War technology come back to haunt
us again?


Share Your Comments About
This Article on the YOWUSA
Message Board

Originally posted by Kunsoo
There was a popular right wing conspiracy theory that the Challenger was destroyed by Soviet sabotage.

Which just shows that there are idiots in every country.

That article gets weirder and weirder as it goes along. Its shocking that anyone published it in the first place. But then again, I have noticed that right wing people tend to support anything that fits their motives even when they know perfectly well that it is nonsense.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Which just shows that there are idiots in every country.

That article gets weirder and weirder as it goes along. Its shocking that anyone published it in the first place. But then again, I have noticed that right wing people tend to support anything that fits their motives even when they know perfectly well that it is nonsense.

I like the 'upgrade to the woodpecker radar, a metal softening technology'. I don't know if anyone here knows what the woodpecker radar was so here goes:

40 odd years ago the Soviets and the Americans were paranoid about attacks from ICBM's and bombers so they had powerful radar systems, both sides. We had the Dew line, a massive radar site in the Arctic and they had similar radars. Well in radar talk, a radar mile is about 12 microseconds.

The gist of that is, if you want a radar that is accurate to one mile, you better not send out pulses closer together than 12 microseconds, the time it takes a radar pulse to leave the radar antenna, go out one mile and the return to hit the receive antenna. If you sent out say, 1 pulse every 1 microsecond you wouldn't get much back, it would be like yelling in a church.

So extend that to 1000 miles, now the radar return is 12,000 microseconds. So you can't send out pulses faster than once per 12,000 microseconds or 12 milliseconds to be able to see out to 1000 miles.

The problem with that is, 1000 miles away, the earths' curvature puts the radar signal out of contact with planes flying say, 100,000 feet or so, they might see satellites because they are a few hundred miles high but stuff on the ground, forget it.

That is because radar had evolved from 100 megahertz to much higher frequencies, say 10,000 megahertz, 10 gigahertz. This allowed much better resolution because the wavelength is so short a lot of wavelengths paint a target so you get a good picture of whatever it is you are targeting with your radar.

So the Soviets decided to go to the opposite end of the spectrum, around 10 to 20 megahertz and use very low frequency pulse recurrance times, (PRF). Those lower frequencies bounce back to earth because of the ionosphere, so those frequencies can go all the way round the planet, sometimes several times.

Like I mentioned, to see 1000 miles you have to have prf around 12 milliseconds. But if you want to see 10,000 miles over the curvature of the earth, you have to use low frequencies like 10 megahertz which will propagate all the way around the planet under the right conditions. So a frequency of 10 megahertz is a wavelength of about 30 meters, about the size of a whole bomber, so you won't get much in the way of resolution.

What's more, to get a range of say, 10,000 miles, you need a pulse recurrance frequency of around 120 milliseconds, about 8 pulses per second.

It ticked off hams like me no end to hear that 'woodpecker', it would do its bap bap bap bap thing on one frequency for a couple of minutes, then change to another close frequency and start over, going from something like 25 mhz down to maybe 5 megahertz and of course with 10 million watt transmitters, they would send a signal all the way round the planet and ticked off thousands of us all over the world, of course nothing could be done about it.

Fortunately the advent of satellites put a halt to that, they could get much better images about launches and bomber runs and so forth.

The thing about this so-called metal softening crap using woodpecker technology, if the plane was like 2 feet in front of the transmitter antenna, maybe there could be some kind of reaction to metal, most probably arcing, but 10,000 miles away, the energy would be so low as to require a receiver with an antenna to pick it up and therefore totally impossible for any kind of radio transmission to cause any kind of metal softening.

It's just a stupid concept with no basis in reality.

I have worked on airborne radar, microwave communications, satellite communications, was on the Apollo at Goddard Space flight center, have an extra class ham licence so I consider myself somewhat knowledgeable about radio waves and such.