HAARP? Mexican Earthquake Mega-Simulation Drill Coincided With Earthquake!

[maryals]

I am not saying that every modern earthquake is man made I'm just saying, based on my research, that it is quite possible.
I could hold an internet class here on Tesla and resonance, or I could leave it to each of you to do your research as your personal time permits.
You are an awesome, intelligent group of people! You know how to research! As the resident Teslaphile I'm happy to steer your direction if you wish

As for Climate Change being man made: we know there is a lot of controversy. Competent Scientists argue both sides. And there are some good arguments on both sides.
I could write more but I am still fighting a head cold that makes my brain foggy, makes it hard to think. Sorry...I'll try later when this bug is gone

Mary and Baby

[Judee]

OK fine, but can you prove this? Or explain how you know this? I very much doubt it, since no one else can either. What you state is a belief based on things you have read, written by people who don't understand it (since no one understands it because we don't have the data nor the models necessary to understand it). I don't fault you for believing it, but belief has little to do with it for me. Explain it to me and I will "believe" (ie have a logical theory which can be substantiated) because I have some reason to do so. That is why I "believed" in climate change - there was data to support it. There is not now, it has been invalidated for me, so I do not "believe" one way or another, I just know that we don't know.

Explain which part of it? The fact that man is hastening climate change in a small way, or the fact that massive climate change has happened before in cycles?

[Project]

Explain which part of it? The fact that man is hastening climate change in a small way, or the fact that massive climate change has happened before in cycles?

Umm either one? We have nothing to base that one except belief. Yes, we know there were ice ages, but we don't know how small fluctuations in climate happened, nor why.

[Project]

The last place I go to for info about Nicola Tesla is Wikipedia. Allow me to direct you to:

"My Inventions" The Autobiography of Nicola Tesla
Edited, with introduction by Ben Johnson
Copyright 1982
Published by Barnes and Noble Inc
ISBN 0-76070-085-0


"The Man Who Invented The Twentieth Century" by Robert Lomas
First published 1999 by Headline Book Publishing
a Division of Hodder Headline PLC
338 Euston Rd
London NW1 3BH
ISBN 0 7472 7588 2


"Tesla Man Out Of Time" by Margaret Cheney
Published by Barnes and Noble Inc copyright 1981
ISBN 0-88028-419-1

"The Life and Times of Nicola Tesla" "Biography of a Genius" by Marc J Seifer
A Birch Lane Press Book
Published by Carol Publishing Group
In Canada: Canadian Manda Group
ISBN 1-55972-329-7 (hc)


And a coffee table book: "Tesla Master of Lightening" by Margaret Cheney and Robert Uth, Technical editor Jim Glenn
Published by Barnes and Noble
ISBN 0-7607-1005-8


Yes these books are on my shelf, I have read them all. In researching for research books I was able to avoid those "Biographies" and such of the more sensational nature.

I do appreciate your questions Project, it keeps me on my toes and gives me a chance to share my research

Mary and Baby

As far as I can tell Wikipedia is correct in this matter. It agrees with your point anyways, so how is it wrong? Books about Tesla are famous for taking liberties with the truth, so I don't think any information about him is above reproach. As I mentioned, the Mythbusters tested this and found it was plausible that it could shake a building given enough time and tuning.

I am not arguing he created or did not create a resonance device, I just don't see how shaking a building equates to causing a massive earthquake. These are not the same things. An earthquake is a sudden release of massive pressure. Resonance might be able to set things trembling, but it doesn't give me a valid explanation of how earthquakes could be set off at will with down-to-the-minute accuracy.

[Alpha]

Let me ask this.

Again, What is proof??

Is either believing that either Wiki is sound or that current so "called provable" things are fact, a barometer of truth?

Is not "religion",belief, paradigm?

What is "valid"....on what criteria and terms? What is not "valid" for the same? ...and who says so?

There are so many inexplicable things on this planet, our universe that we attempt to understand.

For me, I don't trust the PTB that have manipulated our reality, including what we consider to be "fact", "truth" any more than what they do with anything else....to do so,would be very short sighted IMHO.

I would encourage all to look and seek the possibilities that can or may be...not to poo poo things and negate them for what they may or may not be, because if anything, whatever we know is wrong and it is nowhere near any truth IMHO.

[Judee]

Umm either one? We have nothing to base that one except belief. Yes, we know there were ice ages, but we don't know how small fluctuations in climate happened, nor why.

Seriously? You discount all the ice core samples and results of scientific research? It's pretty scientifically evident (proven) exactly what causes climate change and how!

[pyrite]

http://anticorruptionsociety.com/201...modificiation/

Dr Agnew explains in detail how HAARP can create earthquakes - to include the tell tale signs that expose it as the source. Dr Agnew also explains the impact that HAARP has when it is used as a mind-control weapon.


http://anticorruptionsociety.files.w...gnew_haarp.mp3
clip of interview with Noory/Agnew

[maryals]

I didn't say that Wikipedia is wrong....did I? I just said that for researching Tesla, that is a source I don't use. Why would I when I have very good books on Tesla? And as I wrote, I researched the research. The books I have come highly recommended by serious Tesla researchers.
An earthquake is a release of massive pressure. When the "trembling" is set up with the correct resonance frequency in a fracture zone, or fault, it could give just enough "kick" (don't know if that's really the right word) or release for the earth to do the rest.
Like, when cutting a diamond, one of the hardest natural subsistances, the cutter looks for the lines of fracture and that's where the cutter strikes. It doesn't need great force or power, it just requires hitting that fracture at the right place. The diamond splits, or a piece of it splits off.
I'm not saying or even guessing that the earthquakes can be set off with "...down to the minute accuracy...".

I'm enjoying this debate. But I must ask you or anyone here to not put words in my mouth. Thanks

Mary and Baby