[tkadm30 (OP)]

My initial question is: "Is Hurricane Harvey evidence of geoengineering"?

No, it's just a hurricane.
We have known about them for centuries- well before there was any possibility of geoengineering.

You have no proof that this geomagnetic storm did not happened because of directed ULF/VLF signaling
in the ionosphere. This hurricane was the signature of a frankenstorm; not your typical hurricane.

[Bored chemist]

You have no proof that this geomagnetic storm did not happened because of directed ULF/VLF signaling
in the ionosphere. This hurricane was the signature of a frankenstorm; not your typical hurricane.

You  have no proof that it wasn't caused by masses of invisible unicorns farting.
But it would be just as foolish to think that was the cause as it would be to leap to the conclusion that it was caused by geoengineering..

You should learn some ideas like the nature of evidence and the burden of proof before you try posting on grown-up science web sites.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_evidence
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof_(philosophy)

You say "This hurricane was the signature of a frankenstorm; not your typical hurricane."
Is a "frankenstorm" properly defined, of something made up by the media /weather presenters?

[Kryptid]

Interesting that you mention the Scharnhorst effect.  Would it not be equally valid to think that we don’t actually know the speed of light in a complete vacuum?  All we know is the speed of light in the “quantum soup” we call the vacuum.

If I remember correctly, I once plugged some of the equations into a spreadsheet and found that you can get the speed of light all the way up to infinity with sufficiently close Casimir plate separations. However, I'm a little doubtful that would work in practice.

You have no proof that this geomagnetic storm did not happened because of directed ULF/VLF signaling
in the ionosphere.

No, no, no! This must be the third time I've told you that you can't do this. You are shifting the burden of proof. You don't tell your opponents to disprove your claim: you have to prove it. Would you assume that Bigfoot exists solely because he hasn't been proven not to exist? That is faulty reasoning.

This hurricane was the signature of a frankenstorm; not your typical hurricane.

Based on what reasoning? Nothing about Hurricane Harvey was beyond nature's ability to produce. There have been tropical cyclones in the past that have exceeded Harvey in every way: wind speed, diameter, rainfall, the works.

[evan_au]

Nothing about Hurricane Harvey was beyond nature's ability to produce.

On the international news tonight, the Asia reporter commented that the recent floods in Asia were 8 times more severe than Hurricane Harvey.

Unfortunately, I missed the measure he was using for this comparison, but I got the impression he was talking about water volume.

Of course, the annual monsoon that affects a continent would dump a lot more water than a relatively local hurricane...

[Kryptid]

Of course, the annual monsoon that affects a continent would dump a lot more water than a relatively local hurricane...

A lot of tropical cyclones worldwide have exceeded Hurricane Harvey in terms of rainfall. Wikipedia lists 39 with higher rainfall records: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wettest_tropical_cyclones. HAARP was established in 1993, and 18 of these storms occurred before that year. Surely not even tkadm30 believes that each of these storms were amped by secret weather control technology?

[tkadm30 (OP)]

You say "This hurricane was the signature of a frankenstorm; not your typical hurricane."
Is a "frankenstorm" properly defined, of something made up by the media /weather presenters?

I did not invented the term "frankenstorm"...
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Sandy

[tkadm30 (OP)]

A lot of tropical cyclones worldwide have exceeded Hurricane Harvey in terms of rainfall. Wikipedia lists 39 with higher rainfall records: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wettest_tropical_cyclones. HAARP was established in 1993, and 18 of these storms occurred before that year. Surely not even tkadm30 believes that each of these storms were amped by secret weather control technology?

lol

Do you deny the existence of superhurricanes?

Do you think superhurricanes are evidences of directed ULF/VLF signal propagation in the lower ionosphere?

[tkadm30 (OP)]

If Hurricane Harvey was a geomagnetic storm, the probability that directed ULF/VLF signal propagation in the ionosphere caused a strong ionospheric response is high.

[Bill S]

If I remember correctly, I once plugged some of the equations into a spreadsheet and found that you can get the speed of light all the way up to infinity with sufficiently close Casimir plate separations. However, I'm a little doubtful that would work in practice.

I suspect that any calculation that includes infinity will not work in practice.

[Kryptid]

Do you deny the existence of superhurricanes?

If by "superhurricane" you mean "really strong hurricane", of course not.

Do you think superhurricanes are evidences of directed ULF/VLF signal propagation in the lower ionosphere?

Absolutely not. Powerful hurricanes have occurred for a very long time.

If Hurricane Harvey was a geomagnetic storm, the probability that directed ULF/VLF signal propagation in the ionosphere caused a strong ionospheric response is high.

No it isn't. You haven't demonstrated any way to distinguish between a naturally occurring hurricane and one that is manipulated by weather technology. What test would you use?

[Bored chemist]

I did not invented the term "frankenstorm"..

Nobody said you did.
However, unless you can say what it means, you might as well not bother with the word.

[evan_au]

If Hurricane Harvey was a geomagnetic storm, the probability that directed ULF/VLF signal propagation in the ionosphere caused a strong ionospheric response is high.

Geomagnetic storms are well-studied. One in March 1989 blacked out much of Quebec, and caused auroras as far south as Florida. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_1989_geomagnetic_storm

Since then, a lot of study has gone into geomagnetic storms, how to measure them, predict them, and how to minimise damage from them.

The power levels are so high, and the frequencies involved are so low that it is currently impossible for humans to generate anything even approaching what the Sun can do (and has done).

So I don't think that hurricane Harvey was a geomagnetic storm. It was a weather storm.

You can find a lot of current information here, in a rather accessible form: http://spaceweather.com/
If you want to research associations between Hurricanes and geomagnetic storms, you can find detailed historical information here:
https://ngdc.noaa.gov/stp/spaceweather.html

[tkadm30 (OP)]

You haven't demonstrated any way to distinguish between a naturally occurring hurricane and one that is manipulated by weather technology. What test would you use?

Its quite simple. You simply need to visualize ionospheric ULF/VLF signal propagation (heat) during and after the storm for Corpus Christi (and Houston). You may find out that the distance (D) between Corpus Christi and Houston matches the relative intensity (RI) of ionospheric heat for this precise geolocation.

[tkadm30 (OP)]

Geomagnetic storms are well-studied. One in March 1989 blacked out much of Quebec, and caused auroras as far south as Florida. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_1989_geomagnetic_storm

Since then, a lot of study has gone into geomagnetic storms, how to measure them, predict them, and how to minimise damage from them.

The power levels are so high, and the frequencies involved are so low that it is currently impossible for humans to generate anything even approaching what the Sun can do (and has done).

So I don't think that hurricane Harvey was a geomagnetic storm. It was a weather storm.

You can find a lot of current information here, in a rather accessible form: http://spaceweather.com/
If you want to research associations between Hurricanes and geomagnetic storms, you can find detailed historical information here:
https://ngdc.noaa.gov/stp/spaceweather.html

All storms are ionospheric by nature. The lower ionosphere produces stratospheric storms, heat, and rainfall.

[Colin2B]

If Hurricane Harvey was a geomagnetic storm, the probability that directed ULF/VLF signal propagation in the ionosphere caused a strong ionospheric response is high.

Harvey was not a geomagnetic storm.
Hurricanes and geomagnetic storms are totally different phenomena with totally different causes, the only thing they have in common is the name storm. Whoever is feeding you misinformation doesn't understand the difference and certainly doesn't understand hurricanes.
Take the example of the video you linked to. The narrator describes 2 disruptions to the eye wall - claimed to be due to geoengineering - however, as I said earlier, these are natural events in normal hurricanes. You have to forget the cartoon graphics of hurricanes and realise that these are dynamic systems in which the eyewall is in constant change. In a strong hurricane like Harvey rainbands spiral in from the outside and form multiple eyewalls, the central eyewall will then disappear (appearing to be disrupted) and be replaced by the outer wall. Known as the eyewall replacement cycle this can have serious consequence as the power of the hurricane can increase dramatically following such a replacement and if it occurs before landfall the damage can be substantially magnified.

All storms are ionospheric by nature. The lower ionosphere produces stratospheric storms, heat, and rainfall.

This is also misinformation. Stratospheric storms are not ionospheric. The lower band of the ionosphere is significantly above the top of the stratosphere and does not produce any stratospheric weather storms or rainfall.
Another piece of misinformation is that heating the upper layers will increase the power of a hurricane. Hurricanes are heat engines, in conditions ideal for a rapid increase in strength - high water temperatures and low wind shear - warm moist air rises and then cools, releasing heat, to fall and recirculate into the base of the hurricane. This cooling and recirculation is essential for the continuation of the cycle and any heating of the upper layers would disrupt the process and weaken the hurricane.

You haven't demonstrated any way to distinguish between a naturally occurring hurricane and one that is manipulated by weather technology. What test would you use?

Its quite simple. You simply need to visualize ionospheric ULF/VLF signal propagation (heat) during and after the storm for Corpus Christi (and Houston). You may find out that the distance (D) between Corpus Christi and Houston matches the relative intensity (RI) of ionospheric heat for this precise geolocation.

As explained above this heating cannot increase the strength of the hurricane.

[jeffreyH]

I think tkadm30 adheres to the tried and tested principle of putting ones fingers in ones ears and reciting the scientific mantra "la la la la la not listening." I believe this was first practiced by Newton in his many disputes with rivals.

[Kryptid]

ionospheric ULF/VLF signal propagation (heat)

And how do you know that any given region of heat is caused by "ionospheric ULF/VLF signal propagation"?

You may find out that the distance (D) between Corpus Christi and Houston matches the relative intensity (RI) of ionospheric heat for this precise geolocation.

Citation needed.

[mrsmith2211]

So far as I can surmise, this is a random act of nature, to post your question to you,
You haven't demonstrated any way to distinguish between a naturally occurring hurricane and one that is manipulated by weather technology. What test would you use?

[tkadm30 (OP)]

And how do you know that any given region of heat is caused by "ionospheric ULF/VLF signal propagation"?

i believe superhurricanes are partly influenced by directed ionospheric heating. It is well established that electromagnetic energy creates heat when emitting microwaves beams. This heating power may influence superhurricane formation and intensity.

[Bored chemist]

And how do you know that any given region of heat is caused by "ionospheric ULF/VLF signal propagation"?

i believe superhurricanes are partly influenced by directed ionospheric heating. It is well established that electromagnetic energy creates heat when emitting microwaves beams. This heating power may influence superhurricane formation and intensity.

Reality doesn't give a flying one what you believe; nor will we unless you have evidence.

I think tkadm30 adheres to the tried and tested principle of putting ones fingers in ones ears and reciting the scientific mantra "la la la la la not listening." I believe this was first practiced by Newton in his many disputes with rivals.

The difference was that Newton was quite often right whereas tkadm30 ...isn't.