[Kryptid]

This is a inverifiable claim not supported by evidences.

So can we close this thread? No point in discussing an outlandish claim that you agree has no supporting evidence.

1. I do not claim that Hurricane Harvey and Irma are specifically modified by HAARP.

Oh, right, you're only "suggesting" that weather-modification technology (HAARP or satellites or whatever) "may" have been involved in the modification of Hurricane Harvey. You did, however, make this statement:

HAARP technology is fully functioning and capable of altering geomagnetic storms, including hurricanes.

You very clearly claimed here that HAARP can modify hurricanes.

2. I only request intelligent feedback on the potential role of directed ionospheric heating in hurricane intensification.

Oh please, don't try to suddenly downplay the weather modification angle you're so obviously pushing (as per the previous quote I mentioned where you say HAARP can indeed alter hurricanes).

[tkadm30 (OP)]

This is a inverifiable claim not supported by evidences.

So can we close this thread? No point in discussing an outlandish claim that you agree has no supporting evidence.

1. I do not claim that Hurricane Harvey and Irma are specifically modified by HAARP.

Oh, right, you're only "suggesting" that weather-modification technology (HAARP or satellites or whatever) "may" have been involved in the modification of Hurricane Harvey. You did, however, make this statement:

HAARP technology is fully functioning and capable of altering geomagnetic storms, including hurricanes.

You very clearly claimed here that HAARP can modify hurricanes.

2. I only request intelligent feedback on the potential role of directed ionospheric heating in hurricane intensification.

Oh please, don't try to suddenly downplay the weather modification angle you're so obviously pushing (as per the previous quote I mentioned where you say HAARP can indeed alter hurricanes).

lol... the irony!

This is nothing personal Kryptid, but don't get your emotions tackle your analytical skills.

We can close the thread whenever no one has anything scientific to say about ionospheric heating and the effects of directed ULF/VLF microwave modulation on hurricane formation - I'm particularly interested by geometric modulation and ULF/VLF signal propagation in the lower ionosphere.

 

[Bored chemist]

We can close the thread whenever no one has anything scientific to say about ionospheric heating and the effects of directed ULF/VLF microwave modulation on hurricane formation

Mankind has no  technology  powerful enough to meaningfully  influence the behaviour of a hurricane.
" Total energy released through cloud/rain formation:
An average hurricane produces 1.5 cm/day (0.6 inches/day) of rain inside a circle of radius 665 km (360 n.mi) (Gray 1981). (More rain falls in the inner portion of hurricane around the eyewall, less in the outer rainbands.) Converting this to a volume of rain gives 2.1 x 10^16 cm3/day. A cubic cm of rain weighs 1 gm. Using the latent heat of condensation, this amount of rain produced gives
5.2 x 10^19 Joules/day or
6.0 x 10^14 Watts.

This is equivalent to 200 times the world-wide electrical generating capacity - an incredible amount of energy produced!"
from
http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/D7.html

Apart from that, there's nothing scientific to say about it.
So, we can- by the OP's own reckoning- close the thread.

[tkadm30 (OP)]

An average hurricane produces 1.5 cm/day (0.6 inches/day) of rain

You're comparing an apple with an orange. A "superhurricane" like Harvey belong to another class of hurricanes.

[Kryptid]

lol... the irony!

This is nothing personal Kryptid, but don't get your emotions tackle your analytical skills.

My conclusion that there isn't any weather-control technology of the type you speak isn't an emotionally-derived one. It's based on the fact that I have no reason to believe that it exists (and several reasons to believe that it does not).

We can close the thread whenever no one has anything scientific to say about ionospheric heating and the effects of directed ULF/VLF microwave modulation on hurricane formation - I'm particularly interested by geometric modulation and ULF/VLF signal propagation in the lower ionosphere.

We already have: there is no scientifically conclusive evidence to suggest that microwaves directed into the ionosphere have any effect on hurricane formation. Everyone else here is in agreement with that. You are the only one saying otherwise.

[tkadm30 (OP)]

lol... the irony!

This is nothing personal Kryptid, but don't get your emotions tackle your analytical skills.

My conclusion that there isn't any weather-control technology of the type you speak isn't an emotionally-derived one. It's based on the fact that I have no reason to believe that it exists (and several reasons to believe that it does not).

We can close the thread whenever no one has anything scientific to say about ionospheric heating and the effects of directed ULF/VLF microwave modulation on hurricane formation - I'm particularly interested by geometric modulation and ULF/VLF signal propagation in the lower ionosphere.

We already have: there is no scientifically conclusive evidence to suggest that microwaves directed into the ionosphere have any effect on hurricane formation. Everyone else here is in agreement with that. You are the only one saying otherwise.

You should read "Owning the weather in 2025".
I'm sorry I can't disclose topsecret informations on HAARP.

[Bored chemist]

I'm sorry I can't disclose topsecret informations on HAARP.

If you know about it, then it can't be that secret.
If it's secret then it can't be verified so it's not scientific.

[tkadm30 (OP)]

I'm sorry I can't disclose topsecret informations on HAARP.

If you know about it, then it can't be that secret.
If it's secret then it can't be verified so it's not scientific.

I disagree; Information is a secret weapon in this world we live in.

[Bored chemist]

I'm just glad democracy worked this time.

It's way off topic but, in the interests of maintaining factual accuracy- which I think is important on a science web site- the candidate who won more votes didn't get elected.
Democracy failed to take place. There is no need for further discussion of that fact in this thread.

The true purpose of this post is education and information.

People volition will decide what is the truth.

Education is only going to happen here when you accept that you are wrong and learn what is right.
On which note you are wrong to say "People volition will decide what is the truth."
Reality will decide what is the truth.
That's the whole point of science, and you seem to be wilfully trying to pretend it's not true.

[Bored chemist]

I'm sorry I can't disclose topsecret informations on HAARP.

If you know about it, then it can't be that secret.
If it's secret then it can't be verified so it's not scientific.

I disagree; Information is a secret weapon in this world we live in.

Non sequitur.
The point remains, if it's secret  it can't be verified so it's not science.
It can, however be scientifically refuted.
Since a hurricane has about  a hundred times more power than the whole of  humanity can muster, it's fair to assume we are not going to change a hurricane by very much.
Unless you can propose a plausible mechanism by which a gnat's fart of power is gong to make a difference, you can stop wasting our time on the idea.

[tkadm30 (OP)]

Non sequitur.

Are you going to speak latin everytime you want to insist in your complete ignorance of my post?

[Kryptid]

You should read "Owning the weather in 2025".

You mean this? http://csat.au.af.mil/2025/volume3/vol3ch15.pdf

Here is an interesting excerpt from the paper:

The desirability to modify storms to support military objectives is the most aggressive and
controversial type of weather-modification. The damage caused by storms is indeed horrendous. For
instance, a tropical storm has an energy equal to 10,000 one-megaton hydrogen bombs,18 and in 1992
Hurricane Andrew totally destroyed Homestead AFB, Florida, caused the evacuation of most military
aircraft in the southeastern US, and resulted in $15.5 billion of damage. However, as one would expect
based on a storm’s energy level, current scientific literature indicates that there are definite physical limits on
mankind’s ability to modify storm systems. By taking this into account along with political, environmental,
economic, legal, and moral considerations, we will confine our analysis of storms to localized thunderstorms
and thus do not consider major storm systems such as hurricanes or intense low-pressure systems.

This is exactly what we've been saying all along.

I'm sorry I can't disclose topsecret informations on HAARP.

You're assuming that HAARP has weather controlling abilities that are being kept secret in the first place.

[tkadm30 (OP)]

You mean this? http://csat.au.af.mil/2025/volume3/vol3ch15.pdf

Here is an interesting excerpt from the paper:

The desirability to modify storms to support military objectives is the most aggressive and
controversial type of weather-modification. The damage caused by storms is indeed horrendous. For
instance, a tropical storm has an energy equal to 10,000 one-megaton hydrogen bombs,18 and in 1992
Hurricane Andrew totally destroyed Homestead AFB, Florida, caused the evacuation of most military
aircraft in the southeastern US, and resulted in $15.5 billion of damage. However, as one would expect
based on a storm’s energy level, current scientific literature indicates that there are definite physical limits on
mankind’s ability to modify storm systems. By taking this into account along with political, environmental,
economic, legal, and moral considerations, we will confine our analysis of storms to localized thunderstorms
and thus do not consider major storm systems such as hurricanes or intense low-pressure systems.

This is exactly what we've been saying all along.

This is not claiming that weather modification (geoengineering) technology is not possible... And topsecret information must not even be mentioned in official documents like this one.

[Kryptid]

This is not claiming that weather modification (geoengineering) technology is not possible...

Of course not. It's saying that hurricanes specifically are beyond our current limits to practically control. We might be able to control hurricanes in the future, but there is no indication that we have anywhere near the needed technology to do it today.
 

And topsecret information must not even be mentioned in official documents like this one.

You're assuming that such information exists in the first place.

[tkadm30 (OP)]

Of course not. It's saying that hurricanes specifically are beyond our current limits to practically control. We might be able to control hurricanes in the future, but there is no indication that we have anywhere near the needed technology to do it today.

I largely agree, but remember that this document is outdated...

[Kryptid]

I largely agree, but remember that this document is outdated...

As Bored Chemist pointed out, even the worldwide power output is only 0.5% of that generated by an average hurricane (much less a "superhurricane", as you call them), so we certainly have not come anywhere close to closing the technology gap since this document was published.

[Bored chemist]

Non sequitur.

Are you going to speak latin everytime you want to insist in your complete ignorance of my post?

"Non sequitur" is derived from Latin, but it is part of the English language.
If you don't want to use English words derived from Latin, you will have problems.
For example you can use the words highlighted here

"Are you going to speak latin every time you want to insist in your complete ignorance of my post".

But, rather than deciding to complain about words, perhaps you should try addressing the issued they raise.

The assertion you made wasn't logically connected to the things you based it on.

Your assertion " Information is a secret weapon in this world we live in." may even be true, but it has nothing to do with my point that "If it's secret then it can't be verified so it's not scientific."

[Bill S]

When posting in science, we all have our likes,
And value our erudite goals;
So we’d all do much better to get on our bikes
Than to stick around here feeding trolls.

[Kryptid]

When posting in science, we all have our likes,
And value our erudite goals;
So we’d all do much better to get on our bikes
Than to stick around here feeding trolls.

I get what you're saying. Tkadm30 admitted in another thread to having been diagnosed with schizophrenia. That almost certainly contributes to his paranoia. It's very doubtful reason can prevail here. That's not meant to be an insult to you, tkadm30. Paranoia is a common symptom of schizophrenia.

[tkadm30 (OP)]

Apparently, there have been some cloud seeding operations in Texas on august 24.

https://www.activistpost.com/2017/09/cloud-seeding-used-hurricane-harvey-amplifying-impact.html

http://wtwma.com/Daily%20Operations/TPWMA/08242017T.pdf

If theses links are dead let me know, Thanks.