Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [Methane Hydrate Club] A question for "Dr". Walt.

Expand Messages
  • foryeshua1@juno.com
    Pawn, I taught Science, and every other subject in grade school, then went to Middle school, and taught Science & Health, as a Substitute I teach k-12. My
    Message 1 of 6 , Jul 5, 2002
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Pawn, I taught Science, and every other subject in grade school, then
      went to Middle school, and taught Science & Health, as a Substitute I
      teach k-12. My PhD is in education Curriculum and instruction. My
      dissertation was a statistical analysis of the relative effectiveness of
      a polarized light answering device for programmed instruction which I
      had invented and patented several years earlier. This was not my first
      intention, but it was readily accepted by my advisor, when the first idea
      ran up against a lack of adequate machines to measure what I wanted to
      measure. I come from a family of inventors. I have invented 20
      infinitely variable mechanical, non slipping transmissions, and patented
      3. I have come up with original questions in every area I have studied,
      as well as several original answers. I believe that I have several Prima
      Facia (meaning that one example is enough to prove it, this is no
      statistical game. It is a game of seeing structures that exist, making
      predictions from the order they infer, coming up with answers because the
      inferences are accurate, and then statisticians can go to work evaluating
      the possibility odds that are indicated by the fulfillment of the
      predictions.) examples of the SE working in several places. People that
      are so used to seeing everything and looking for everything in
      statistical terms don't know that you can't measure the possibilities of
      the cause without inferring the source and sequence of how it possibly
      works by coming up with inference that if proven true becomes a theory.
      Seeing lightening strike does not enable you to understand where it is
      coming from and going to. No phenomena can be statistically evaluated
      until someone evaluates it with questions and answers which give an idea
      that can be measured. Then you can say I couldn't find this when I
      measured it this way. You then know you measured wrongly, or your idea
      doesn't exist and obviously can't be measured. When I found that
      insulating the drilling shaft of early oil well drilling rigs stopped
      both lightening and tornados, I knew what was the process and cause of
      tornados. The people that did it, said "Whew" went on drilling and
      getting oil without tornadoes nor lightening and didn't say to
      themselves. We can control where tornados hit. This is an example of
      Prima Facia Evidence that was totally missed.
      Lately some of the descriptions being given of what is going on that
      you are describing, have been more understandable. I think you are
      describing something. I am not convinced that a whole enough picture is
      being painted to allow people to decide where to measure and what it can
      tell us. I believe the SE and its interaction is what you need to really
      have a picture that completes the whole pattern of what is happening
      electrically. I have tossed out static electricity a long time ago. All
      electricity is coming from somewhere and going along a path which will
      eventually find it retracing its paths. The main path is from and back
      to the Sun, for all of the planets of our solar system. It is NOT
      CMEjections. It is far more steady in its current or CME would control
      it instead of the other way around. It turns the world on its axis, it
      powers the weather jets, it heats the center of the earth, etc.
      Maybe later, Walter
      I didn't know you asked that question. I also did not feel that you
      read enough of my materials to even be interested in what I was saying. I
      did not get feedback on a lot of things I wrote and decided that you
      didn't respond because you had no input nor questions, or you didn't get
      it. It also has occurred to me that we both are trying to sell
      electricity as a foundational force that most scientists, don't know
      enough about to begin to think in its terms. needed to do if there is to
      be successful challenging and changing of the current Scientific attitude
      toward electricity.

      On Fri, 05 Jul 2002 16:25:41 -0000 "pawnfart" <mike@...> writes:
      If you want to unsubscribe, I am not sure you did it correctly. But
      that isn't my question.

      My question I asked before, unanswered, is what is your PhD? What,
      IOW, do you teach?

      ++++++++

      Here is a specific comment from last year where a substantive
      discusssion did occur on another bb regarding EMFs and what is
      discussed here. I posed it to B-1 and we didn't get to far. This is
      the type of question I was hoping someone like you could help us out
      with but it appears that you aren't who you say you are:

      (quoting B-1 solar CME data):


      Solar wind speed : 664.5 km/sec Solar wind density : 5.3 protons/cc
      Solar wind pressure : 3.9 nPa

      <SNIP>

      Me again:


      "What I think you should note more then anything is the proton stream
      from the sun, because these are particles that will be sorted by
      SSTs. "

      Alan from OZ writes:


      "Mike what I want you to note, is just how small this flux of protons
      appears to be to this dimbo technician. And if this is the solar wind
      before hitting the earth's surface, then presumably not all of these
      charges even make it to the earth.

      ***I really do need a physicist's comment here, **** if i=q/t, (where
      i = current in amps, & q = quantity of electric charges in Coulombs)
      and if the electrical charge on a electron is about 1.602 x 10^-19
      coulombs, then we need to move: 1 / 1.602 x 10^-19C per sec to pass
      1Amp of current. Or 6.24 x 10^18 electrons must be moved for a
      current of 1A.

      The solar wind protons moving in a "tube" of space of csa 1cm^2 @
      664. km/s above would only move 5.3 x 664.5 x 1000m charges, or 3.52
      x 10^6 protons. If this calc. is correct, then you should be able to
      see that this is a *very small* movement of charges/second compared
      to even 1 ampere. [John L. please comment] {my comment inserted--
      another poster in the conversation who is a physics head}

      It seems to me that you are seeing something here that is a form of
      "number blindness". "

      Comments? How would the SE organize these charges? SSTs? Strikes
      caused by convection in relation to current movement in the
      ionosphere? Induction of currents in the ionosphere from daily
      expansion and contraction? QBO (50 mb winds of ions that move about
      90 mph)?



      To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      methanehydrateclub-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • pawnfart
      ... is ... I agree with that. But there is now science about strikes out there that when put into context of radar images is very helpful. More below. When I
      Message 2 of 6 , Jul 5, 2002
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        > Seeing lightening strike does not enable you to understand where it
        is
        > coming from and going to.

        I agree with that. But there is now science about strikes out there
        that when put into context of radar images is very helpful. More
        below.

        When I found that
        > insulating the drilling shaft of early oil well drilling rigs
        stopped
        > both lightening and tornados, I knew what was the process and cause
        of
        > tornados. The people that did it, said "Whew" went on drilling and
        > getting oil without tornadoes nor lightening and didn't say to
        > themselves. We can control where tornados hit. This is an example
        of
        > Prima Facia Evidence that was totally missed.

        Take your words in the context of my further comments about Texas
        flooding and Doran waves:

        http://www.weatherimages.org/data/imag87.html

        Above, again, the strike/radar link.


        I want to talk a little more about Doran waves. South of Texas in
        Mexico along the southern border the monsoons started in a way that
        the wet strip extends south to there based on a world radar I saw
        today on TWC. The wet lines extend far north. Dry strips, again, go
        to the Sea of Cortez, and there is a dry line w/ undoubtedly west to
        east winds in the GOM. There is also a dry strip that has been moving
        about in the NE.
        Anyway, there is a reason why they are shaped in strips and if there
        is EMF activity in a strip it is severe, I suspect. If there is any
        convection in a dry strip (say a jet stream causes instability or an
        area of storms with intense EMF activity by strikes from wave top to
        wave top with the area in question between them in the dry strip) and
        a strike goes to ground, there would be much larger positive ion
        concentrations to ground and a source of, therefore, VERY positively
        charged cloud tops pre strike. If a storm were more on a frontal
        boundary the EMF extremes, the ion concentrations, would find much
        easier equilibriums.

        My view is the cirrus must be sustained in incredible ways, and that
        explains some of the outrageous rainfalls and tornado activity that
        has resulted. The strike activity in Texas has been very interesting
        to watch for about two weeks now.

        Yet the Doran waves have had difficulty reaching Arizona, given the
        EMF condition, very positive, of the north Sea of Cortez.

        When Allison flooded Texas last year about the same time as it is
        being flooded now, it was the product of a tropical storm, or a warm
        core low. In this instance, the flooding is per an upper low.

        Last year, the W. GOM was completely covered w/ cirrus and the
        surface winds moved from the middle of the GOM to the low--inducting
        EMF for cirrus. The low sucked all that moisture in the E. GOM into
        Texas. Right now, the dry air portion of the E. GOM has winds moving
        essentially west to east, inducting against cirrus and providing
        upper air balances for negative EMF in the ionosphere for the charges
        to enhance cirrus in the upper atmosphere. The heat and convection
        is local but the EMF source of the movement of cirrus to provide such
        balances that cause this rain are also based in the E. GOM. This is
        all electrical.




        > Lately some of the descriptions being given of what is going on
        that
        > you are describing, have been more understandable. I think you are
        > describing something. I am not convinced that a whole enough
        picture is
        > being painted to allow people to decide where to measure and what
        it can
        > tell us.

        Now that I know a little more about you I will re post some of the
        conversations I have had w/ Alan, a systems electrician. It gets
        pretty mathy and it breaks down, I think, in ways you will appreciate.




        I believe the SE and its interaction is what you need to really
        > have a picture that completes the whole pattern of what is happening
        > electrically.

        I agree. What I wanted to comment on is there are Dr. Gray
        statistics as to 500 mb winds over Greenland and near the Pac NW that
        are TS intellegant for the following season. I will have more
        comments later. But for now, the key issue is going to be the
        insulative properties of the air and how that defines things in terms
        of strikes and Schumann resonances--and IR balances and what is then
        feed back from that. What you may be hitting on will have to do with
        how EMF get organized and why the induction works in a directional
        manner . . .



        I have tossed out static electricity a long time ago. All
        > electricity is coming from somewhere and going along a path which
        will
        > eventually find it retracing its paths. The main path is from and
        back
        > to the Sun, for all of the planets of our solar system. It is NOT
        > CMEjections. It is far more steady in its current or CME would
        control
        > it instead of the other way around.

        I don't disagree. HOWEVER, the SE controls the organization of the
        field and the particles in it, not the particles in it. The
        particles impact the cirrus, which impacts the convection, strikes,
        and so forth--so you have a feedback impact, whereas the SE is in
        less flux relative to WEATHER. Climate may be another thing
        (timescales), BUT at the end of the day the biosphere wins, because
        if it did not, we would not be hear rapping about this.


        It turns the world on its axis, it
        > powers the weather jets, it heats the center of the earth, etc.
        > Maybe later, Walter
        > I didn't know you asked that question. I also did not feel that
        you
        > read enough of my materials to even be interested in what I was
        saying. I
        > did not get feedback on a lot of things I wrote and decided that you
        > didn't respond because you had no input nor questions, or you
        didn't get
        > it. It also has occurred to me that we both are trying to sell
        > electricity as a foundational force that most scientists, don't know
        > enough about to begin to think in its terms. needed to do if there
        is to
        > be successful challenging and changing of the current Scientific
        attitude
        > toward electricity.

        We have common ground for sure. I don't think, however, that EMF are
        THE modulating force by and of themselves. Instead, it is EMF
        modulated by the biosphere . . .



        >
        > On Fri, 05 Jul 2002 16:25:41 -0000 "pawnfart" <mike@u...> writes:
        > If you want to unsubscribe, I am not sure you did it correctly.
        But
        > that isn't my question.
        >
        > My question I asked before, unanswered, is what is your PhD? What,
        > IOW, do you teach?
        >
        > ++++++++
        >
        > Here is a specific comment from last year where a substantive
        > discusssion did occur on another bb regarding EMFs and what is
        > discussed here. I posed it to B-1 and we didn't get to far. This
        is
        > the type of question I was hoping someone like you could help us
        out
        > with but it appears that you aren't who you say you are:
        >
        > (quoting B-1 solar CME data):
        >
        >
        > Solar wind speed : 664.5 km/sec Solar wind density : 5.3 protons/cc
        > Solar wind pressure : 3.9 nPa
        >
        > <SNIP>
        >
        > Me again:
        >
        >
        > "What I think you should note more then anything is the proton
        stream
        > from the sun, because these are particles that will be sorted by
        > SSTs. "
        >
        > Alan from OZ writes:
        >
        >
        > "Mike what I want you to note, is just how small this flux of
        protons
        > appears to be to this dimbo technician. And if this is the solar
        wind
        > before hitting the earth's surface, then presumably not all of
        these
        > charges even make it to the earth.
        >
        > ***I really do need a physicist's comment here, **** if i=q/t,
        (where
        > i = current in amps, & q = quantity of electric charges in
        Coulombs)
        > and if the electrical charge on a electron is about 1.602 x 10^-19
        > coulombs, then we need to move: 1 / 1.602 x 10^-19C per sec to pass
        > 1Amp of current. Or 6.24 x 10^18 electrons must be moved for a
        > current of 1A.
        >
        > The solar wind protons moving in a "tube" of space of csa 1cm^2 @
        > 664. km/s above would only move 5.3 x 664.5 x 1000m charges, or
        3.52
        > x 10^6 protons. If this calc. is correct, then you should be able
        to
        > see that this is a *very small* movement of charges/second compared
        > to even 1 ampere. [John L. please comment] {my comment inserted--
        > another poster in the conversation who is a physics head}
        >
        > It seems to me that you are seeing something here that is a form of
        > "number blindness". "
        >
        > Comments? How would the SE organize these charges? SSTs? Strikes
        > caused by convection in relation to current movement in the
        > ionosphere? Induction of currents in the ionosphere from daily
        > expansion and contraction? QBO (50 mb winds of ions that move
        about
        > 90 mph)?
        >
        >
        >
        > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        > methanehydrateclub-unsubscribe@y...
        >
        >
        >
        > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
        Service.
        >
        > [Non-text portions
      • midlantwx
        From midlantwx: Your discussions are fascinating! How do these Wet Strips and Dry Strips correlate to the devastating drought in the Mid Atlantic? Our
        Message 3 of 6 , Jul 6, 2002
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          From midlantwx: Your discussions are fascinating!

          How do these "Wet Strips" and "Dry Strips" correlate to the devastating drought in the Mid Atlantic? Our lawns are brown already and it's only early July! Precipitation income has been below climatic norms since early September last year.


          -midlantwx







          --- In methanehydrateclub@y..., "pawnfart" <mike@u...> wrote:
          > > Seeing lightening strike does not enable you to understand where it
          > is
          > > coming from and going to.
          >
          > I agree with that. But there is now science about strikes out there
          > that when put into context of radar images is very helpful. More
          > below.
          >
          > When I found that
          > > insulating the drilling shaft of early oil well drilling rigs
          > stopped
          > > both lightening and tornados, I knew what was the process and cause
          > of
          > > tornados. The people that did it, said "Whew" went on drilling and
          > > getting oil without tornadoes nor lightening and didn't say to
          > > themselves. We can control where tornados hit. This is an example
          > of
          > > Prima Facia Evidence that was totally missed.
          >
          > Take your words in the context of my further comments about Texas
          > flooding and Doran waves:
          >
          > http://www.weatherimages.org/data/imag87.html
          >
          > Above, again, the strike/radar link.
          >
          >
          > I want to talk a little more about Doran waves. South of Texas in
          > Mexico along the southern border the monsoons started in a way that
          > the wet strip extends south to there based on a world radar I saw
          > today on TWC. The wet lines extend far north. Dry strips, again, go
          > to the Sea of Cortez, and there is a dry line w/ undoubtedly west to
          > east winds in the GOM. There is also a dry strip that has been moving
          > about in the NE.
          > Anyway, there is a reason why they are shaped in strips and if there
          > is EMF activity in a strip it is severe, I suspect. If there is any
          > convection in a dry strip (say a jet stream causes instability or an
          > area of storms with intense EMF activity by strikes from wave top to
          > wave top with the area in question between them in the dry strip) and
          > a strike goes to ground, there would be much larger positive ion
          > concentrations to ground and a source of, therefore, VERY positively
          > charged cloud tops pre strike. If a storm were more on a frontal
          > boundary the EMF extremes, the ion concentrations, would find much
          > easier equilibriums.
          >
          > My view is the cirrus must be sustained in incredible ways, and that
          > explains some of the outrageous rainfalls and tornado activity that
          > has resulted. The strike activity in Texas has been very interesting
          > to watch for about two weeks now.
          >
          > Yet the Doran waves have had difficulty reaching Arizona, given the
          > EMF condition, very positive, of the north Sea of Cortez.
          >
          > When Allison flooded Texas last year about the same time as it is
          > being flooded now, it was the product of a tropical storm, or a warm
          > core low. In this instance, the flooding is per an upper low.
          >
          > Last year, the W. GOM was completely covered w/ cirrus and the
          > surface winds moved from the middle of the GOM to the low--inducting
          > EMF for cirrus. The low sucked all that moisture in the E. GOM into
          > Texas. Right now, the dry air portion of the E. GOM has winds moving
          > essentially west to east, inducting against cirrus and providing
          > upper air balances for negative EMF in the ionosphere for the charges
          > to enhance cirrus in the upper atmosphere. The heat and convection
          > is local but the EMF source of the movement of cirrus to provide such
          > balances that cause this rain are also based in the E. GOM. This is
          > all electrical.
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > > Lately some of the descriptions being given of what is going on
          > that
          > > you are describing, have been more understandable. I think you are
          > > describing something. I am not convinced that a whole enough
          > picture is
          > > being painted to allow people to decide where to measure and what
          > it can
          > > tell us.
          >
          > Now that I know a little more about you I will re post some of the
          > conversations I have had w/ Alan, a systems electrician. It gets
          > pretty mathy and it breaks down, I think, in ways you will appreciate.
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > I believe the SE and its interaction is what you need to really
          > > have a picture that completes the whole pattern of what is happening
          > > electrically.
          >
          > I agree. What I wanted to comment on is there are Dr. Gray
          > statistics as to 500 mb winds over Greenland and near the Pac NW that
          > are TS intellegant for the following season. I will have more
          > comments later. But for now, the key issue is going to be the
          > insulative properties of the air and how that defines things in terms
          > of strikes and Schumann resonances--and IR balances and what is then
          > feed back from that. What you may be hitting on will have to do with
          > how EMF get organized and why the induction works in a directional
          > manner . . .
          >
          >
          >
          > I have tossed out static electricity a long time ago. All
          > > electricity is coming from somewhere and going along a path which
          > will
          > > eventually find it retracing its paths. The main path is from and
          > back
          > > to the Sun, for all of the planets of our solar system. It is NOT
          > > CMEjections. It is far more steady in its current or CME would
          > control
          > > it instead of the other way around.
          >
          > I don't disagree. HOWEVER, the SE controls the organization of the
          > field and the particles in it, not the particles in it. The
          > particles impact the cirrus, which impacts the convection, strikes,
          > and so forth--so you have a feedback impact, whereas the SE is in
          > less flux relative to WEATHER. Climate may be another thing
          > (timescales), BUT at the end of the day the biosphere wins, because
          > if it did not, we would not be hear rapping about this.
          >
          >
          > It turns the world on its axis, it
          > > powers the weather jets, it heats the center of the earth, etc.
          > > Maybe later, Walter
          > > I didn't know you asked that question. I also did not feel that
          > you
          > > read enough of my materials to even be interested in what I was
          > saying. I
          > > did not get feedback on a lot of things I wrote and decided that you
          > > didn't respond because you had no input nor questions, or you
          > didn't get
          > > it. It also has occurred to me that we both are trying to sell
          > > electricity as a foundational force that most scientists, don't know
          > > enough about to begin to think in its terms. needed to do if there
          > is to
          > > be successful challenging and changing of the current Scientific
          > attitude
          > > toward electricity.
          >
          > We have common ground for sure. I don't think, however, that EMF are
          > THE modulating force by and of themselves. Instead, it is EMF
          > modulated by the biosphere . . .
          >
          >
          >
          > >
          > > On Fri, 05 Jul 2002 16:25:41 -0000 "pawnfart" <mike@u...> writes:
          > > If you want to unsubscribe, I am not sure you did it correctly.
          > But
          > > that isn't my question.
          > >
          > > My question I asked before, unanswered, is what is your PhD? What,
          > > IOW, do you teach?
          > >
          > > ++++++++
          > >
          > > Here is a specific comment from last year where a substantive
          > > discusssion did occur on another bb regarding EMFs and what is
          > > discussed here. I posed it to B-1 and we didn't get to far. This
          > is
          > > the type of question I was hoping someone like you could help us
          > out
          > > with but it appears that you aren't who you say you are:
          > >
          > > (quoting B-1 solar CME data):
          > >
          > >
          > > Solar wind speed : 664.5 km/sec Solar wind density : 5.3 protons/cc
          > > Solar wind pressure : 3.9 nPa
          > >
          > > <SNIP>
          > >
          > > Me again:
          > >
          > >
          > > "What I think you should note more then anything is the proton
          > stream
          > > from the sun, because these are particles that will be sorted by
          > > SSTs. "
          > >
          > > Alan from OZ writes:
          > >
          > >
          > > "Mike what I want you to note, is just how small this flux of
          > protons
          > > appears to be to this dimbo technician. And if this is the solar
          > wind
          > > before hitting the earth's surface, then presumably not all of
          > these
          > > charges even make it to the earth.
          > >
          > > ***I really do need a physicist's comment here, **** if i=q/t,
          > (where
          > > i = current in amps, & q = quantity of electric charges in
          > Coulombs)
          > > and if the electrical charge on a electron is about 1.602 x 10^-19
          > > coulombs, then we need to move: 1 / 1.602 x 10^-19C per sec to pass
          > > 1Amp of current. Or 6.24 x 10^18 electrons must be moved for a
          > > current of 1A.
          > >
          > > The solar wind protons moving in a "tube" of space of csa 1cm^2 @
          > > 664. km/s above would only move 5.3 x 664.5 x 1000m charges, or
          > 3.52
          > > x 10^6 protons. If this calc. is correct, then you should be able
          > to
          > > see that this is a *very small* movement of charges/second compared
          > > to even 1 ampere. [John L. please comment] {my comment inserted--
          > > another poster in the conversation who is a physics head}
          > >
          > > It seems to me that you are seeing something here that is a form of
          > > "number blindness". "
          > >
          > > Comments? How would the SE organize these charges? SSTs? Strikes
          > > caused by convection in relation to current movement in the
          > > ionosphere? Induction of currents in the ionosphere from daily
          > > expansion and contraction? QBO (50 mb winds of ions that move
          > about
          > > 90 mph)?
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
          > > methanehydrateclub-unsubscribe@y...
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
          > Service.
          > >
          > > [Non-text portions
        • pawnfart
          Hi Mid, Nice to hear from you. The short answer is how strongly neg the Gaia produced Doran wave has been to the Florida to Mississippi delta region compared
          Message 4 of 6 , Jul 6, 2002
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            Hi Mid,

            Nice to hear from you.

            The short answer is how strongly neg the Gaia produced Doran wave has
            been to the Florida to Mississippi delta region compared to the
            drought areas off the NE coast, which provided a place for a dry
            strip to curve. But also the dams from W. Africa and S. America have
            really delayed EMF pulses from the tropics that sometimes bring Cape
            Verde waves and moisture to your neck of the woods.

            Here are two exchanges from another climate bb on the Doran waves:
            Subject: Re: More Doran waves and Texas flooding

            > Yet the Doran waves have had difficulty reaching Arizona, given the
            EMF
            > condition, very positive, of the north Sea of Cortez.
            >
            > Where do you get your "figures" for the EMF condition? Is there a
            site
            > which lists them, or do you calculate them from a formula or what?

            When you watch a wave ripple outward on a lake from a stone you have
            thrown, do you do math? Are you really THAT DUMB with your math?

            Again, I have been merely observing this link:

            http://www.weatherimages.org/data/imag87.html

            And watching dry strips and wet and cirrus and strikes. It's all
            very
            basic.

            The numbers on EMF I have posted here again and again. For instance,
            the
            numbers of fair weather voltage positive to ground of 250 volts. Or
            what
            strike voltages are, or sprites and elves from cloud top to
            ionosphere.
            Or what ion concentrations are prestorm. Or how cloud bottoms go
            negitive pre strike and tops positive. So there certainly is a
            relative
            or general path. The general description works, because all I am
            describing is a wave.

            The relative biological conditions between the North Sea of Cortez
            and
            the GOM would then present relatively more negitive strikes and a
            negitive to posistive condition between the two Gulfs, and has very
            significant Gaia implications. The fact that it then can be observed,
            both in terms of dry patches over sea AND land, as well as wave forms
            and
            severe weather from shorts across these waves, is significant without
            math.

            I will say this. When Alan was here there were calculations about
            CME
            winds and protons and what currents would be involved and what he
            showed
            was that the solar wind was on order of magnetude smaller then what
            would
            be expected to be signifincant. These are valuable mathematical
            comments, but certainly should apply when the current peer reviewed
            science on EMFs and strikes are in agreement about the lower
            ionosphere's
            positive charges and strikes, elves, and sprites, as well as there is
            agreement, say, about the terresphere's slightly acidic pH.

            Which brings me to John Lerch's assertion that rivers are not crossed
            because they are thermally different. I tend to think that would go
            to
            intesity not whether it would occur or not. I further think that
            water
            spouts is not a good example because a body of water can gain a net
            charge, and lakes tend to have acidic pHs. A river, OTOH, will be
            connected more likely then not to EMFs that do not provide charge
            accumulations that the storm seeks. If the charges were found on a
            lake,
            for instance, the lakes surface temperature compared to the land is
            more
            offset by the IR differences between sustained cirrus or not far
            above
            the spout. So, where a river fails is more likely by its EMF
            potential.
            Likewise, the metal of a tailer park is more likely to maintain, like
            capacitors, a positive charge accumulated from fair weather
            conditions
            and hold it to be discharged for a storm.

            John, I am truly surprised you cannot see this.

            ++++++++++++++

            > Please forgive me Mike. I still think the post about
            > tornadoes is probably idiotic, but I've been trashing
            > the doran wave thread posts without reading them.

            I don't know what to say to that or whether I should even reply.

            > Therefore, I did a google search to see if this is
            > original with you; and I guess it must be since I found
            > nothing.

            My name is Mike Doran. Figure it out.



            > If you want to, would you please post a primer with
            > these facts (less than 5k):
            > What is the inertial object (i.e. what coasts along)?

            In general the ionosphere is slightly positive. Published peer
            reviewed
            authors on the subject maintain that the ionosphere is maintained by
            strikes, and recently evidence of sprite and elve activity above
            thunderstorms confirms this theory. Fair weather voltages then apply
            this positive charge accumulation to ground, which leads to the fair
            weather voltage that has been discussed here by Alan and others.
            Alan
            got a 150 volt positive reading from one of his text books. I have
            seen
            several internet sources for fair weather voltages--all at a range
            from
            100 to 250 volts per meter squared.

            Strikes, as you know, carry very powerful EMF. They in general bring
            electrons or negitive charges to ground, and the ultimate source of
            those
            electrons is the ionosphere.

            I submit that there are current flows in the ionosphere and deep
            under
            the earth where magma is more conductive, as well as charge
            accumulations
            in the oceans, on land. That there are charges that ocean currents
            present, as well as varying resistances. As you may know, when
            induction
            occurs there is not only the resistance of the medium but also
            resistance
            from the induction itself. Further, there is the insulation by the
            hydrates and the pH and temperatures differences in the oceans.

            > What is the restoring "force"?

            The currents flow from charge accumulations to charge depreciated
            areas.
            What happens is that there are several areas where insulation is so
            great
            that great accumulations must occur before a discharge creates EMF
            equillibrium in a area. But while charge seperatations exist, they
            enhance or not cirrus cloud behavior, which in turn varies IR
            balances
            and convection processes.

            > Is there something that builds up i.e. is there some
            > kind of shock?

            See above.


            > Is the interaction of the inertial object and the
            > restoring object dependent on one or the other to a
            > much higher than linear dependence? I.E. is there a
            > feedback which causes the shock? (Reverse the order of
            > these last 2 paragraphs.)

            There is a discussion below on the life of thunderstorms, how
            initially
            the charges of a forming thunderstorm accumulate. The ground below
            the
            thunderstorm, where the dry line exists, accumulates positive
            charges. I
            provided a link on the ions accumulating in a previous post. The
            bottom
            clouds then bring their electrons, pre strike, near these charges.
            Those
            charges come from the entire cloud, making it more positive,
            relatively
            speaking. Cirrus clouds, then, with a positive charge in the upper
            reaches of the cloud, eventually reach a point where they are more
            positive then the lower ionosphere--which is pretty positive to start
            with. That causes movements of ions in the ionosphere--negitive
            ones, to
            come above the forming thunderstorm. This then attracts the cirrus
            clouds and causes favorable IR balances for further convection and
            heating of the cloud--because instead of falling, the ice crystals
            are
            attracted to the ionosphere. This is why severe weather contains
            hail!
            I realize there are other thermal processes at work, but the basic
            driving dynamic of SEVERE storms is EMFs.

            Now, once a strike occurs, the cloud becomes EXTREMELY positively
            charged, and so the sprite and elve activity occurs. That passes the
            electrons accumulated in the ionosphere to the cloud top and balances
            EMFs just above the storm. The ice crystals are no longer held by
            EMF
            and they begin to fall--as precip.

            However, the ionosphere post strike is now relatively positively
            charged
            for loss from the elve/sprite activity and the cirrus that doesn't
            fall
            as rain carries the charge of the ionosphere where electrons
            accumulated--
            so it will be relatively negitive compared now to the ionsphere, and
            hence blow off cirrus is going to be attracted to the ionosphere for
            some
            time after a strike . . .

            Slowly, as the ionosphere regains its relatively more negitive charge
            and
            the cirrus its positive charge, sometimes 75 miles away from a storm
            center, they are no longer enhanced by EMFs . . .

            It is in these delicate balances of EMFs that Doran waves move up and
            down between ground and ionosphere over hundreds of miles. The
            result is
            clearly visable on the link I have provided for this discussion.

            > PS what is the origin of the word doran? JAL

            Doran means 'stranger' in Gaelic.

            What does Lerch mean?

            --- In methanehydrateclub@y..., midlantwx <no_reply@y...> wrote:
            > From midlantwx: Your discussions are fascinating!
            >
            > How do these "Wet Strips" and "Dry Strips" correlate to the
            devastating drought in the Mid Atlantic? Our lawns are brown already
            and it's only early July! Precipitation income has been below
            climatic norms since early September last year.
            >
            >
            > -midlantwx
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > --- In methanehydrateclub@y..., "pawnfart" <mike@u...> wrote:
            > > > Seeing lightening strike does not enable you to understand
            where it
            > > is
            > > > coming from and going to.
            > >
            > > I agree with that. But there is now science about strikes out
            there
            > > that when put into context of radar images is very helpful. More
            > > below.
            > >
            > > When I found that
            > > > insulating the drilling shaft of early oil well drilling rigs
            > > stopped
            > > > both lightening and tornados, I knew what was the process and
            cause
            > > of
            > > > tornados. The people that did it, said "Whew" went on drilling
            and
            > > > getting oil without tornadoes nor lightening and didn't say to
            > > > themselves. We can control where tornados hit. This is an
            example
            > > of
            > > > Prima Facia Evidence that was totally missed.
            > >
            > > Take your words in the context of my further comments about Texas
            > > flooding and Doran waves:
            > >
            > > http://www.weatherimages.org/data/imag87.html
            > >
            > > Above, again, the strike/radar link.
            > >
            > >
            > > I want to talk a little more about Doran waves. South of Texas in
            > > Mexico along the southern border the monsoons started in a way
            that
            > > the wet strip extends south to there based on a world radar I saw
            > > today on TWC. The wet lines extend far north. Dry strips, again,
            go
            > > to the Sea of Cortez, and there is a dry line w/ undoubtedly west
            to
            > > east winds in the GOM. There is also a dry strip that has been
            moving
            > > about in the NE.
            > > Anyway, there is a reason why they are shaped in strips and if
            there
            > > is EMF activity in a strip it is severe, I suspect. If there is
            any
            > > convection in a dry strip (say a jet stream causes instability or
            an
            > > area of storms with intense EMF activity by strikes from wave top
            to
            > > wave top with the area in question between them in the dry strip)
            and
            > > a strike goes to ground, there would be much larger positive ion
            > > concentrations to ground and a source of, therefore, VERY
            positively
            > > charged cloud tops pre strike. If a storm were more on a frontal
            > > boundary the EMF extremes, the ion concentrations, would find
            much
            > > easier equilibriums.
            > >
            > > My view is the cirrus must be sustained in incredible ways, and
            that
            > > explains some of the outrageous rainfalls and tornado activity
            that
            > > has resulted. The strike activity in Texas has been very
            interesting
            > > to watch for about two weeks now.
            > >
            > > Yet the Doran waves have had difficulty reaching Arizona, given
            the
            > > EMF condition, very positive, of the north Sea of Cortez.
            > >
            > > When Allison flooded Texas last year about the same time as it is
            > > being flooded now, it was the product of a tropical storm, or a
            warm
            > > core low. In this instance, the flooding is per an upper low.
            > >
            > > Last year, the W. GOM was completely covered w/ cirrus and the
            > > surface winds moved from the middle of the GOM to the low--
            inducting
            > > EMF for cirrus. The low sucked all that moisture in the E. GOM
            into
            > > Texas. Right now, the dry air portion of the E. GOM has winds
            moving
            > > essentially west to east, inducting against cirrus and providing
            > > upper air balances for negative EMF in the ionosphere for the
            charges
            > > to enhance cirrus in the upper atmosphere. The heat and
            convection
            > > is local but the EMF source of the movement of cirrus to provide
            such
            > > balances that cause this rain are also based in the E. GOM. This
            is
            > > all electrical.
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > > Lately some of the descriptions being given of what is
            going on
            > > that
            > > > you are describing, have been more understandable. I think you
            are
            > > > describing something. I am not convinced that a whole enough
            > > picture is
            > > > being painted to allow people to decide where to measure and
            what
            > > it can
            > > > tell us.
            > >
            > > Now that I know a little more about you I will re post some of
            the
            > > conversations I have had w/ Alan, a systems electrician. It gets
            > > pretty mathy and it breaks down, I think, in ways you will
            appreciate.
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > I believe the SE and its interaction is what you need to really
            > > > have a picture that completes the whole pattern of what is
            happening
            > > > electrically.
            > >
            > > I agree. What I wanted to comment on is there are Dr. Gray
            > > statistics as to 500 mb winds over Greenland and near the Pac NW
            that
            > > are TS intellegant for the following season. I will have more
            > > comments later. But for now, the key issue is going to be the
            > > insulative properties of the air and how that defines things in
            terms
            > > of strikes and Schumann resonances--and IR balances and what is
            then
            > > feed back from that. What you may be hitting on will have to do
            with
            > > how EMF get organized and why the induction works in a
            directional
            > > manner . . .
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > I have tossed out static electricity a long time ago. All
            > > > electricity is coming from somewhere and going along a path
            which
            > > will
            > > > eventually find it retracing its paths. The main path is from
            and
            > > back
            > > > to the Sun, for all of the planets of our solar system. It is
            NOT
            > > > CMEjections. It is far more steady in its current or CME would
            > > control
            > > > it instead of the other way around.
            > >
            > > I don't disagree. HOWEVER, the SE controls the organization of
            the
            > > field and the particles in it, not the particles in it. The
            > > particles impact the cirrus, which impacts the convection,
            strikes,
            > > and so forth--so you have a feedback impact, whereas the SE is in
            > > less flux relative to WEATHER. Climate may be another thing
            > > (timescales), BUT at the end of the day the biosphere wins,
            because
            > > if it did not, we would not be hear rapping about this.
            > >
            > >
            > > It turns the world on its axis, it
            > > > powers the weather jets, it heats the center of the earth,
            etc.
            > > > Maybe later, Walter
            > > > I didn't know you asked that question. I also did not feel
            that
            > > you
            > > > read enough of my materials to even be interested in what I was
            > > saying. I
            > > > did not get feedback on a lot of things I wrote and decided
            that you
            > > > didn't respond because you had no input nor questions, or you
            > > didn't get
            > > > it. It also has occurred to me that we both are trying to sell
            > > > electricity as a foundational force that most scientists, don't
            know
            > > > enough about to begin to think in its terms. needed to do if
            there
            > > is to
            > > > be successful challenging and changing of the current
            Scientific
            > > attitude
            > > > toward electricity.
            > >
            > > We have common ground for sure. I don't think, however, that EMF
            are
            > > THE modulating force by and of themselves. Instead, it is EMF
            > > modulated by the biosphere . . .
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > >
            > > > On Fri, 05 Jul 2002 16:25:41 -0000 "pawnfart" <mike@u...>
            writes:
            > > > If you want to unsubscribe, I am not sure you did it
            correctly.
            > > But
            > > > that isn't my question.
            > > >
            > > > My question I asked before, unanswered, is what is your PhD?
            What,
            > > > IOW, do you teach?
            > > >
            > > > ++++++++
            > > >
            > > > Here is a specific comment from last year where a substantive
            > > > discusssion did occur on another bb regarding EMFs and what is
            > > > discussed here. I posed it to B-1 and we didn't get to far.
            This
            > > is
            > > > the type of question I was hoping someone like you could help
            us
            > > out
            > > > with but it appears that you aren't who you say you are:
            > > >
            > > > (quoting B-1 solar CME data):
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > Solar wind speed : 664.5 km/sec Solar wind density : 5.3
            protons/cc
            > > > Solar wind pressure : 3.9 nPa
            > > >
            > > > <SNIP>
            > > >
            > > > Me again:
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > "What I think you should note more then anything is the proton
            > > stream
            > > > from the sun, because these are particles that will be sorted
            by
            > > > SSTs. "
            > > >
            > > > Alan from OZ writes:
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > "Mike what I want you to note, is just how small this flux of
            > > protons
            > > > appears to be to this dimbo technician. And if this is the
            solar
            > > wind
            > > > before hitting the earth's surface, then presumably not all of
            > > these
            > > > charges even make it to the earth.
            > > >
            > > > ***I really do need a physicist's comment here, **** if i=q/t,
            > > (where
            > > > i = current in amps, & q = quantity of electric charges in
            > > Coulombs)
            > > > and if the electrical charge on a electron is about 1.602 x 10^-
            19
            > > > coulombs, then we need to move: 1 / 1.602 x 10^-19C per sec to
            pass
            > > > 1Amp of current. Or 6.24 x 10^18 electrons must be moved for a
            > > > current of 1A.
            > > >
            > > > The solar wind protons moving in a "tube" of space of csa 1cm^2
            @
            > > > 664. km/s above would only move 5.3 x 664.5 x 1000m charges, or
            > > 3.52
            > > > x 10^6 protons. If this calc. is correct, then you should be
            able
            > > to
            > > > see that this is a *very small* movement of charges/second
            compared
            > > > to even 1 ampere. [John L. please comment] {my comment
            inserted--
            > > > another poster in the conversation who is a physics head}
            > > >
            > > > It seems to me that you are seeing something here that is a
            form of
            > > > "number blindness". "
            > > >
            > > > Comments? How would the SE organize these charges? SSTs?
            Strikes
            > > > caused by convection in relation to current movement in the
            > > > ionosphere? Induction of currents in the ionosphere from daily
            > > > expansion and contraction? QBO (50 mb winds of ions that move
            > > about
            > > > 90 mph)?
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
            > > > methanehydrateclub-unsubscribe@y...
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
            > > Service.
            > > >
            > > > [Non-text portions
          • midlantwx
            I would like to be presented with the Long answer please:) When you have the time:) Please load it up with your usual terminology and links!:)) I really enjoy
            Message 5 of 6 , Jul 6, 2002
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              I would like to be presented with the Long answer please:)

              When you have the time:)

              Please load it up with your usual terminology and links!:)) I really enjoy your discourses, reading them and learning from them is one way I unwind after a long day. I kick back in my easy chair and enjoy all your fascinating ideas!!

              Again, please give me the Long version, When you have plenty of time!:) I am willing to wait a couple weeks if need be:)

              Hey man, never give up on this Group!!! I find your discussions interesting, I always have!!! You must have a doctorate or something! Anyway, I enjoy this place!!!! Please keep up your excellent work! You've got some way cool members too!!! They also post very good, quality articles!!!

              Sincerely,

              -midlantwx





              --- In methanehydrateclub@y..., "pawnfart" <mike@u...> wrote:
              > Hi Mid,
              >
              > Nice to hear from you.
              >
              > The short answer is how strongly neg the Gaia produced Doran wave has
              > been to the Florida to Mississippi delta region compared to the
              > drought areas off the NE coast, which provided a place for a dry
              > strip to curve. But also the dams from W. Africa and S. America have
              > really delayed EMF pulses from the tropics that sometimes bring Cape
              > Verde waves and moisture to your neck of the woods.
              >
              > Here are two exchanges from another climate bb on the Doran waves:
              > Subject: Re: More Doran waves and Texas flooding
              >
              > > Yet the Doran waves have had difficulty reaching Arizona, given the
              > EMF
              > > condition, very positive, of the north Sea of Cortez.
              > >
              > > Where do you get your "figures" for the EMF condition? Is there a
              > site
              > > which lists them, or do you calculate them from a formula or what?
              >
              > When you watch a wave ripple outward on a lake from a stone you have
              > thrown, do you do math? Are you really THAT DUMB with your math?
              >
              > Again, I have been merely observing this link:
              >
              > http://www.weatherimages.org/data/imag87.html
              >
              > And watching dry strips and wet and cirrus and strikes. It's all
              > very
              > basic.
              >
              > The numbers on EMF I have posted here again and again. For instance,
              > the
              > numbers of fair weather voltage positive to ground of 250 volts. Or
              > what
              > strike voltages are, or sprites and elves from cloud top to
              > ionosphere.
              > Or what ion concentrations are prestorm. Or how cloud bottoms go
              > negitive pre strike and tops positive. So there certainly is a
              > relative
              > or general path. The general description works, because all I am
              > describing is a wave.
              >
              > The relative biological conditions between the North Sea of Cortez
              > and
              > the GOM would then present relatively more negitive strikes and a
              > negitive to posistive condition between the two Gulfs, and has very
              > significant Gaia implications. The fact that it then can be observed,
              > both in terms of dry patches over sea AND land, as well as wave forms
              > and
              > severe weather from shorts across these waves, is significant without
              > math.
              >
              > I will say this. When Alan was here there were calculations about
              > CME
              > winds and protons and what currents would be involved and what he
              > showed
              > was that the solar wind was on order of magnetude smaller then what
              > would
              > be expected to be signifincant. These are valuable mathematical
              > comments, but certainly should apply when the current peer reviewed
              > science on EMFs and strikes are in agreement about the lower
              > ionosphere's
              > positive charges and strikes, elves, and sprites, as well as there is
              > agreement, say, about the terresphere's slightly acidic pH.
              >
              > Which brings me to John Lerch's assertion that rivers are not crossed
              > because they are thermally different. I tend to think that would go
              > to
              > intesity not whether it would occur or not. I further think that
              > water
              > spouts is not a good example because a body of water can gain a net
              > charge, and lakes tend to have acidic pHs. A river, OTOH, will be
              > connected more likely then not to EMFs that do not provide charge
              > accumulations that the storm seeks. If the charges were found on a
              > lake,
              > for instance, the lakes surface temperature compared to the land is
              > more
              > offset by the IR differences between sustained cirrus or not far
              > above
              > the spout. So, where a river fails is more likely by its EMF
              > potential.
              > Likewise, the metal of a tailer park is more likely to maintain, like
              > capacitors, a positive charge accumulated from fair weather
              > conditions
              > and hold it to be discharged for a storm.
              >
              > John, I am truly surprised you cannot see this.
              >
              > ++++++++++++++
              >
              > > Please forgive me Mike. I still think the post about
              > > tornadoes is probably idiotic, but I've been trashing
              > > the doran wave thread posts without reading them.
              >
              > I don't know what to say to that or whether I should even reply.
              >
              > > Therefore, I did a google search to see if this is
              > > original with you; and I guess it must be since I found
              > > nothing.
              >
              > My name is Mike Doran. Figure it out.
              >
              >
              >
              > > If you want to, would you please post a primer with
              > > these facts (less than 5k):
              > > What is the inertial object (i.e. what coasts along)?
              >
              > In general the ionosphere is slightly positive. Published peer
              > reviewed
              > authors on the subject maintain that the ionosphere is maintained by
              > strikes, and recently evidence of sprite and elve activity above
              > thunderstorms confirms this theory. Fair weather voltages then apply
              > this positive charge accumulation to ground, which leads to the fair
              > weather voltage that has been discussed here by Alan and others.
              > Alan
              > got a 150 volt positive reading from one of his text books. I have
              > seen
              > several internet sources for fair weather voltages--all at a range
              > from
              > 100 to 250 volts per meter squared.
              >
              > Strikes, as you know, carry very powerful EMF. They in general bring
              > electrons or negitive charges to ground, and the ultimate source of
              > those
              > electrons is the ionosphere.
              >
              > I submit that there are current flows in the ionosphere and deep
              > under
              > the earth where magma is more conductive, as well as charge
              > accumulations
              > in the oceans, on land. That there are charges that ocean currents
              > present, as well as varying resistances. As you may know, when
              > induction
              > occurs there is not only the resistance of the medium but also
              > resistance
              > from the induction itself. Further, there is the insulation by the
              > hydrates and the pH and temperatures differences in the oceans.
              >
              > > What is the restoring "force"?
              >
              > The currents flow from charge accumulations to charge depreciated
              > areas.
              > What happens is that there are several areas where insulation is so
              > great
              > that great accumulations must occur before a discharge creates EMF
              > equillibrium in a area. But while charge seperatations exist, they
              > enhance or not cirrus cloud behavior, which in turn varies IR
              > balances
              > and convection processes.
              >
              > > Is there something that builds up i.e. is there some
              > > kind of shock?
              >
              > See above.
              >
              >
              > > Is the interaction of the inertial object and the
              > > restoring object dependent on one or the other to a
              > > much higher than linear dependence? I.E. is there a
              > > feedback which causes the shock? (Reverse the order of
              > > these last 2 paragraphs.)
              >
              > There is a discussion below on the life of thunderstorms, how
              > initially
              > the charges of a forming thunderstorm accumulate. The ground below
              > the
              > thunderstorm, where the dry line exists, accumulates positive
              > charges. I
              > provided a link on the ions accumulating in a previous post. The
              > bottom
              > clouds then bring their electrons, pre strike, near these charges.
              > Those
              > charges come from the entire cloud, making it more positive,
              > relatively
              > speaking. Cirrus clouds, then, with a positive charge in the upper
              > reaches of the cloud, eventually reach a point where they are more
              > positive then the lower ionosphere--which is pretty positive to start
              > with. That causes movements of ions in the ionosphere--negitive
              > ones, to
              > come above the forming thunderstorm. This then attracts the cirrus
              > clouds and causes favorable IR balances for further convection and
              > heating of the cloud--because instead of falling, the ice crystals
              > are
              > attracted to the ionosphere. This is why severe weather contains
              > hail!
              > I realize there are other thermal processes at work, but the basic
              > driving dynamic of SEVERE storms is EMFs.
              >
              > Now, once a strike occurs, the cloud becomes EXTREMELY positively
              > charged, and so the sprite and elve activity occurs. That passes the
              > electrons accumulated in the ionosphere to the cloud top and balances
              > EMFs just above the storm. The ice crystals are no longer held by
              > EMF
              > and they begin to fall--as precip.
              >
              > However, the ionosphere post strike is now relatively positively
              > charged
              > for loss from the elve/sprite activity and the cirrus that doesn't
              > fall
              > as rain carries the charge of the ionosphere where electrons
              > accumulated--
              > so it will be relatively negitive compared now to the ionsphere, and
              > hence blow off cirrus is going to be attracted to the ionosphere for
              > some
              > time after a strike . . .
              >
              > Slowly, as the ionosphere regains its relatively more negitive charge
              > and
              > the cirrus its positive charge, sometimes 75 miles away from a storm
              > center, they are no longer enhanced by EMFs . . .
              >
              > It is in these delicate balances of EMFs that Doran waves move up and
              > down between ground and ionosphere over hundreds of miles. The
              > result is
              > clearly visable on the link I have provided for this discussion.
              >
              > > PS what is the origin of the word doran? JAL
              >
              > Doran means 'stranger' in Gaelic.
              >
              > What does Lerch mean?
              >
              > --- In methanehydrateclub@y..., midlantwx <no_reply@y...> wrote:
              > > From midlantwx: Your discussions are fascinating!
              > >
              > > How do these "Wet Strips" and "Dry Strips" correlate to the
              > devastating drought in the Mid Atlantic? Our lawns are brown already
              > and it's only early July! Precipitation income has been below
              > climatic norms since early September last year.
              > >
              > >
              > > -midlantwx
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > --- In methanehydrateclub@y..., "pawnfart" <mike@u...> wrote:
              > > > > Seeing lightening strike does not enable you to understand
              > where it
              > > > is
              > > > > coming from and going to.
              > > >
              > > > I agree with that. But there is now science about strikes out
              > there
              > > > that when put into context of radar images is very helpful. More
              > > > below.
              > > >
              > > > When I found that
              > > > > insulating the drilling shaft of early oil well drilling rigs
              > > > stopped
              > > > > both lightening and tornados, I knew what was the process and
              > cause
              > > > of
              > > > > tornados. The people that did it, said "Whew" went on drilling
              > and
              > > > > getting oil without tornadoes nor lightening and didn't say to
              > > > > themselves. We can control where tornados hit. This is an
              > example
              > > > of
              > > > > Prima Facia Evidence that was totally missed.
              > > >
              > > > Take your words in the context of my further comments about Texas
              > > > flooding and Doran waves:
              > > >
              > > > http://www.weatherimages.org/data/imag87.html
              > > >
              > > > Above, again, the strike/radar link.
              > > >
              > > >
              > > > I want to talk a little more about Doran waves. South of Texas in
              > > > Mexico along the southern border the monsoons started in a way
              > that
              > > > the wet strip extends south to there based on a world radar I saw
              > > > today on TWC. The wet lines extend far north. Dry strips, again,
              > go
              > > > to the Sea of Cortez, and there is a dry line w/ undoubtedly west
              > to
              > > > east winds in the GOM. There is also a dry strip that has been
              > moving
              > > > about in the NE.
              > > > Anyway, there is a reason why they are shaped in strips and if
              > there
              > > > is EMF activity in a strip it is severe, I suspect. If there is
              > any
              > > > convection in a dry strip (say a jet stream causes instability or
              > an
              > > > area of storms with intense EMF activity by strikes from wave top
              > to
              > > > wave top with the area in question between them in the dry strip)
              > and
              > > > a strike goes to ground, there would be much larger positive ion
              > > > concentrations to ground and a source of, therefore, VERY
              > positively
              > > > charged cloud tops pre strike. If a storm were more on a frontal
              > > > boundary the EMF extremes, the ion concentrations, would find
              > much
              > > > easier equilibriums.
              > > >
              > > > My view is the cirrus must be sustained in incredible ways, and
              > that
              > > > explains some of the outrageous rainfalls and tornado activity
              > that
              > > > has resulted. The strike activity in Texas has been very
              > interesting
              > > > to watch for about two weeks now.
              > > >
              > > > Yet the Doran waves have had difficulty reaching Arizona, given
              > the
              > > > EMF condition, very positive, of the north Sea of Cortez.
              > > >
              > > > When Allison flooded Texas last year about the same time as it is
              > > > being flooded now, it was the product of a tropical storm, or a
              > warm
              > > > core low. In this instance, the flooding is per an upper low.
              > > >
              > > > Last year, the W. GOM was completely covered w/ cirrus and the
              > > > surface winds moved from the middle of the GOM to the low--
              > inducting
              > > > EMF for cirrus. The low sucked all that moisture in the E. GOM
              > into
              > > > Texas. Right now, the dry air portion of the E. GOM has winds
              > moving
              > > > essentially west to east, inducting against cirrus and providing
              > > > upper air balances for negative EMF in the ionosphere for the
              > charges
              > > > to enhance cirrus in the upper atmosphere. The heat and
              > convection
              > > > is local but the EMF source of the movement of cirrus to provide
              > such
              > > > balances that cause this rain are also based in the E. GOM. This
              > is
              > > > all electrical.
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > > > Lately some of the descriptions being given of what is
              > going on
              > > > that
              > > > > you are describing, have been more understandable. I think you
              > are
              > > > > describing something. I am not convinced that a whole enough
              > > > picture is
              > > > > being painted to allow people to decide where to measure and
              > what
              > > > it can
              > > > > tell us.
              > > >
              > > > Now that I know a little more about you I will re post some of
              > the
              > > > conversations I have had w/ Alan, a systems electrician. It gets
              > > > pretty mathy and it breaks down, I think, in ways you will
              > appreciate.
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > > I believe the SE and its interaction is what you need to really
              > > > > have a picture that completes the whole pattern of what is
              > happening
              > > > > electrically.
              > > >
              > > > I agree. What I wanted to comment on is there are Dr. Gray
              > > > statistics as to 500 mb winds over Greenland and near the Pac NW
              > that
              > > > are TS intellegant for the following season. I will have more
              > > > comments later. But for now, the key issue is going to be the
              > > > insulative properties of the air and how that defines things in
              > terms
              > > > of strikes and Schumann resonances--and IR balances and what is
              > then
              > > > feed back from that. What you may be hitting on will have to do
              > with
              > > > how EMF get organized and why the induction works in a
              > directional
              > > > manner . . .
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > > I have tossed out static electricity a long time ago. All
              > > > > electricity is coming from somewhere and going along a path
              > which
              > > > will
              > > > > eventually find it retracing its paths. The main path is from
              > and
              > > > back
              > > > > to the Sun, for all of the planets of our solar system. It is
              > NOT
              > > > > CMEjections. It is far more steady in its current or CME would
              > > > control
              > > > > it instead of the other way around.
              > > >
              > > > I don't disagree. HOWEVER, the SE controls the organization of
              > the
              > > > field and the particles in it, not the particles in it. The
              > > > particles impact the cirrus, which impacts the convection,
              > strikes,
              > > > and so forth--so you have a feedback impact, whereas the SE is in
              > > > less flux relative to WEATHER. Climate may be another thing
              > > > (timescales), BUT at the end of the day the biosphere wins,
              > because
              > > > if it did not, we would not be hear rapping about this.
              > > >
              > > >
              > > > It turns the world on its axis, it
              > > > > powers the weather jets, it heats the center of the earth,
              > etc.
              > > > > Maybe later, Walter
              > > > > I didn't know you asked that question. I also did not feel
              > that
              > > > you
              > > > > read enough of my materials to even be interested in what I was
              > > > saying. I
              > > > > did not get feedback on a lot of things I wrote and decided
              > that you
              > > > > didn't respond because you had no input nor questions, or you
              > > > didn't get
              > > > > it. It also has occurred to me that we both are trying to sell
              > > > > electricity as a foundational force that most scientists, don't
              > know
              > > > > enough about to begin to think in its terms. needed to do if
              > there
              > > > is to
              > > > > be successful challenging and changing of the current
              > Scientific
              > > > attitude
              > > > > toward electricity.
              > > >
              > > > We have common ground for sure. I don't think, however, that EMF
              > are
              > > > THE modulating force by and of themselves. Instead, it is EMF
              > > > modulated by the biosphere . . .
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > > >
              > > > > On Fri, 05 Jul 2002 16:25:41 -0000 "pawnfart" <mike@u...>
              > writes:
              > > > > If you want to unsubscribe, I am not sure you did it
              > correctly.
              > > > But
              > > > > that isn't my question.
              > > > >
              > > > > My question I asked before, unanswered, is what is your PhD?
              > What,
              > > > > IOW, do you teach?
              > > > >
              > > > > ++++++++
              > > > >
              > > > > Here is a specific comment from last year where a substantive
              > > > > discusssion did occur on another bb regarding EMFs and what is
              > > > > discussed here. I posed it to B-1 and we didn't get to far.
              > This
              > > > is
              > > > > the type of question I was hoping someone like you could help
              > us
              > > > out
              > > > > with but it appears that you aren't who you say you are:
              > > > >
              > > > > (quoting B-1 solar CME data):
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > > Solar wind speed : 664.5 km/sec Solar wind density : 5.3
              > protons/cc
              > > > > Solar wind pressure : 3.9 nPa
              > > > >
              > > > > <SNIP>
              > > > >
              > > > > Me again:
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > > "What I think you should note more then anything is the proton
              > > > stream
              > > > > from the sun, because these are particles that will be sorted
              > by
              > > > > SSTs. "
              > > > >
              > > > > Alan from OZ writes:
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > > "Mike what I want you to note, is just how small this flux of
              > > > protons
              > > > > appears to be to this dimbo technician. And if this is the
              > solar
              > > > wind
              > > > > before hitting the earth's surface, then presumably not all of
              > > > these
              > > > > charges even make it to the earth.
              > > > >
              > > > > ***I really do need a physicist's comment here, **** if i=q/t,
              > > > (where
              > > > > i = current in amps, & q = quantity of electric charges in
              > > > Coulombs)
              > > > > and if the electrical charge on a electron is about 1.602 x 10^-
              > 19
              > > > > coulombs, then we need to move: 1 / 1.602 x 10^-19C per sec to
              > pass
              > > > > 1Amp of current. Or 6.24 x 10^18 electrons must be moved for a
              > > > > current of 1A.
              > > > >
              > > > > The solar wind protons moving in a "tube" of space of csa 1cm^2
              > @
              > > > > 664. km/s above would only move 5.3 x 664.5 x 1000m charges, or
              > > > 3.52
              > > > > x 10^6 protons. If this calc. is correct, then you should be
              > able
              > > > to
              > > > > see that this is a *very small* movement of charges/second
              > compared
              > > > > to even 1 ampere. [John L. please comment] {my comment
              > inserted--
              > > > > another poster in the conversation who is a physics head}
              > > > >
              > > > > It seems to me that you are seeing something here that is a
              > form of
              > > > > "number blindness". "
              > > > >
              > > > > Comments? How would the SE organize these charges? SSTs?
              > Strikes
              > > > > caused by convection in relation to current movement in the
              > > > > ionosphere? Induction of currents in the ionosphere from daily
              > > > > expansion and contraction? QBO (50 mb winds of ions that move
              > > > about
              > > > > 90 mph)?
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
              > > > > methanehydrateclub-unsubscribe@y...
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
              > > > Service.
              > > > >
              > > > > [Non-text portions
            • foryeshua1@juno.com
              Mid- I don t know if you are talking to me. I think you are probably talking to Mike the Pawn. Just in case you would like to know about what my ideas are
              Message 6 of 6 , Jul 7, 2002
              View Source
              • 0 Attachment
                Mid- I don't know if you are talking to me. I think you are probably
                talking to Mike the Pawn. Just in case you would like to know about what
                my ideas are you can find them on http://www.vorbitz.com/electrojet You
                can't write to me there though. You need to write to me at
                foryeshua1@... My last three years interaction are not on this site
                though. Descriptions of what have happened must come from me. Dr. Walter
                Peterson

                On Sun, 07 Jul 2002 03:54:24 -0000 midlantwx <no_reply@yahoogroups.com>
                writes:
                I would like to be presented with the Long answer please:)

                When you have the time:)

                Please load it up with your usual terminology and links!:)) I really
                enjoy your discourses, reading them and learning from them is one way I
                unwind after a long day. I kick back in my easy chair and enjoy all your
                fascinating ideas!!

                Again, please give me the Long version, When you have plenty of time!:) I
                am willing to wait a couple weeks if need be:)

                Hey man, never give up on this Group!!! I find your discussions
                interesting, I always have!!! You must have a doctorate or something!
                Anyway, I enjoy this place!!!! Please keep up your excellent work! You've
                got some way cool members too!!! They also post very good, quality
                articles!!!

                Sincerely,

                -midlantwx





                --- In methanehydrateclub@y..., "pawnfart" <mike@u...> wrote:
                > Hi Mid,
                >
                > Nice to hear from you.
                >
                > The short answer is how strongly neg the Gaia produced Doran wave has
                > been to the Florida to Mississippi delta region compared to the
                > drought areas off the NE coast, which provided a place for a dry
                > strip to curve. But also the dams from W. Africa and S. America have
                > really delayed EMF pulses from the tropics that sometimes bring Cape
                > Verde waves and moisture to your neck of the woods.
                >
                > Here are two exchanges from another climate bb on the Doran waves:
                > Subject: Re: More Doran waves and Texas flooding
                >
                > > Yet the Doran waves have had difficulty reaching Arizona, given the
                > EMF
                > > condition, very positive, of the north Sea of Cortez.
                > >
                > > Where do you get your "figures" for the EMF condition? Is there a
                > site
                > > which lists them, or do you calculate them from a formula or what?
                >
                > When you watch a wave ripple outward on a lake from a stone you have
                > thrown, do you do math? Are you really THAT DUMB with your math?
                >
                > Again, I have been merely observing this link:
                >
                > http://www.weatherimages.org/data/imag87.html
                >
                > And watching dry strips and wet and cirrus and strikes. It's all
                > very
                > basic.
                >
                > The numbers on EMF I have posted here again and again. For instance,
                > the
                > numbers of fair weather voltage positive to ground of 250 volts. Or
                > what
                > strike voltages are, or sprites and elves from cloud top to
                > ionosphere.
                > Or what ion concentrations are prestorm. Or how cloud bottoms go
                > negitive pre strike and tops positive. So there certainly is a
                > relative
                > or general path. The general description works, because all I am
                > describing is a wave.
                >
                > The relative biological conditions between the North Sea of Cortez
                > and
                > the GOM would then present relatively more negitive strikes and a
                > negitive to posistive condition between the two Gulfs, and has very
                > significant Gaia implications. The fact that it then can be observed,
                > both in terms of dry patches over sea AND land, as well as wave forms
                > and
                > severe weather from shorts across these waves, is significant without
                > math.
                >
                > I will say this. When Alan was here there were calculations about
                > CME
                > winds and protons and what currents would be involved and what he
                > showed
                > was that the solar wind was on order of magnetude smaller then what
                > would
                > be expected to be signifincant. These are valuable mathematical
                > comments, but certainly should apply when the current peer reviewed
                > science on EMFs and strikes are in agreement about the lower
                > ionosphere's
                > positive charges and strikes, elves, and sprites, as well as there is
                > agreement, say, about the terresphere's slightly acidic pH.
                >
                > Which brings me to John Lerch's assertion that rivers are not crossed
                > because they are thermally different. I tend to think that would go
                > to
                > intesity not whether it would occur or not. I further think that
                > water
                > spouts is not a good example because a body of water can gain a net
                > charge, and lakes tend to have acidic pHs. A river, OTOH, will be
                > connected more likely then not to EMFs that do not provide charge
                > accumulations that the storm seeks. If the charges were found on a
                > lake,
                > for instance, the lakes surface temperature compared to the land is
                > more
                > offset by the IR differences between sustained cirrus or not far
                > above
                > the spout. So, where a river fails is more likely by its EMF
                > potential.
                > Likewise, the metal of a tailer park is more likely to maintain, like
                > capacitors, a positive charge accumulated from fair weather
                > conditions
                > and hold it to be discharged for a storm.
                >
                > John, I am truly surprised you cannot see this.
                >
                > ++++++++++++++
                >
                > > Please forgive me Mike. I still think the post about
                > > tornadoes is probably idiotic, but I've been trashing
                > > the doran wave thread posts without reading them.
                >
                > I don't know what to say to that or whether I should even reply.
                >
                > > Therefore, I did a google search to see if this is
                > > original with you; and I guess it must be since I found
                > > nothing.
                >
                > My name is Mike Doran. Figure it out.
                >
                >
                >
                > > If you want to, would you please post a primer with
                > > these facts (less than 5k):
                > > What is the inertial object (i.e. what coasts along)?
                >
                > In general the ionosphere is slightly positive. Published peer
                > reviewed
                > authors on the subject maintain that the ionosphere is maintained by
                > strikes, and recently evidence of sprite and elve activity above
                > thunderstorms confirms this theory. Fair weather voltages then apply
                > this positive charge accumulation to ground, which leads to the fair
                > weather voltage that has been discussed here by Alan and others.
                > Alan
                > got a 150 volt positive reading from one of his text books. I have
                > seen
                > several internet sources for fair weather voltages--all at a range
                > from
                > 100 to 250 volts per meter squared.
                >
                > Strikes, as you know, carry very powerful EMF. They in general bring
                > electrons or negitive charges to ground, and the ultimate source of
                > those
                > electrons is the ionosphere.
                >
                > I submit that there are current flows in the ionosphere and deep
                > under
                > the earth where magma is more conductive, as well as charge
                > accumulations
                > in the oceans, on land. That there are charges that ocean currents
                > present, as well as varying resistances. As you may know, when
                > induction
                > occurs there is not only the resistance of the medium but also
                > resistance
                > from the induction itself. Further, there is the insulation by the
                > hydrates and the pH and temperatures differences in the oceans.
                >
                > > What is the restoring "force"?
                >
                > The currents flow from charge accumulations to charge depreciated
                > areas.
                > What happens is that there are several areas where insulation is so
                > great
                > that great accumulations must occur before a discharge creates EMF
                > equillibrium in a area. But while charge seperatations exist, they
                > enhance or not cirrus cloud behavior, which in turn varies IR
                > balances
                > and convection processes.
                >
                > > Is there something that builds up i.e. is there some
                > > kind of shock?
                >
                > See above.
                >
                >
                > > Is the interaction of the inertial object and the
                > > restoring object dependent on one or the other to a
                > > much higher than linear dependence? I.E. is there a
                > > feedback which causes the shock? (Reverse the order of
                > > these last 2 paragraphs.)
                >
                > There is a discussion below on the life of thunderstorms, how
                > initially
                > the charges of a forming thunderstorm accumulate. The ground below
                > the
                > thunderstorm, where the dry line exists, accumulates positive
                > charges. I
                > provided a link on the ions accumulating in a previous post. The
                > bottom
                > clouds then bring their electrons, pre strike, near these charges.
                > Those
                > charges come from the entire cloud, making it more positive,
                > relatively
                > speaking. Cirrus clouds, then, with a positive charge in the upper
                > reaches of the cloud, eventually reach a point where they are more
                > positive then the lower ionosphere--which is pretty positive to start
                > with. That causes movements of ions in the ionosphere--negitive
                > ones, to
                > come above the forming thunderstorm. This then attracts the cirrus
                > clouds and causes favorable IR balances for further convection and
                > heating of the cloud--because instead of falling, the ice crystals
                > are
                > attracted to the ionosphere. This is why severe weather contains
                > hail!
                > I realize there are other thermal processes at work, but the basic
                > driving dynamic of SEVERE storms is EMFs.
                >
                > Now, once a strike occurs, the cloud becomes EXTREMELY positively
                > charged, and so the sprite and elve activity occurs. That passes the
                > electrons accumulated in the ionosphere to the cloud top and balances
                > EMFs just above the storm. The ice crystals are no longer held by
                > EMF
                > and they begin to fall--as precip.
                >
                > However, the ionosphere post strike is now relatively positively
                > charged
                > for loss from the elve/sprite activity and the cirrus that doesn't
                > fall
                > as rain carries the charge of the ionosphere where electrons
                > accumulated--
                > so it will be relatively negitive compared now to the ionsphere, and
                > hence blow off cirrus is going to be attracted to the ionosphere for
                > some
                > time after a strike . . .
                >
                > Slowly, as the ionosphere regains its relatively more negitive charge
                > and
                > the cirrus its positive charge, sometimes 75 miles away from a storm
                > center, they are no longer enhanced by EMFs . . .
                >
                > It is in these delicate balances of EMFs that Doran waves move up and
                > down between ground and ionosphere over hundreds of miles. The
                > result is
                > clearly visable on the link I have provided for this discussion.
                >
                > > PS what is the origin of the word doran? JAL
                >
                > Doran means 'stranger' in Gaelic.
                >
                > What does Lerch mean?
                >
                > --- In methanehydrateclub@y..., midlantwx <no_reply@y...> wrote:
                > > From midlantwx: Your discussions are fascinating!
                > >
                > > How do these "Wet Strips" and "Dry Strips" correlate to the
                > devastating drought in the Mid Atlantic? Our lawns are brown already
                > and it's only early July! Precipitation income has been below
                > climatic norms since early September last year.
                > >
                > >
                > > -midlantwx
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > --- In methanehydrateclub@y..., "pawnfart" <mike@u...> wrote:
                > > > > Seeing lightening strike does not enable you to understand
                > where it
                > > > is
                > > > > coming from and going to.
                > > >
                > > > I agree with that. But there is now science about strikes out
                > there
                > > > that when put into context of radar images is very helpful. More
                > > > below.
                > > >
                > > > When I found that
                > > > > insulating the drilling shaft of early oil well drilling rigs
                > > > stopped
                > > > > both lightening and tornados, I knew what was the process and
                > cause
                > > > of
                > > > > tornados. The people that did it, said "Whew" went on drilling
                > and
                > > > > getting oil without tornadoes nor lightening and didn't say to
                > > > > themselves. We can control where tornados hit. This is an
                > example
                > > > of
                > > > > Prima Facia Evidence that was totally missed.
                > > >
                > > > Take your words in the context of my further comments about Texas
                > > > flooding and Doran waves:
                > > >
                > > > http://www.weatherimages.org/data/imag87.html
                > > >
                > > > Above, again, the strike/radar link.
                > > >
                > > >
                > > > I want to talk a little more about Doran waves. South of Texas in
                > > > Mexico along the southern border the monsoons started in a way
                > that
                > > > the wet strip extends south to there based on a world radar I saw
                > > > today on TWC. The wet lines extend far north. Dry strips, again,
                > go
                > > > to the Sea of Cortez, and there is a dry line w/ undoubtedly west
                > to
                > > > east winds in the GOM. There is also a dry strip that has been
                > moving
                > > > about in the NE.
                > > > Anyway, there is a reason why they are shaped in strips and if
                > there
                > > > is EMF activity in a strip it is severe, I suspect. If there is
                > any
                > > > convection in a dry strip (say a jet stream causes instability or
                > an
                > > > area of storms with intense EMF activity by strikes from wave top
                > to
                > > > wave top with the area in question between them in the dry strip)
                > and
                > > > a strike goes to ground, there would be much larger positive ion
                > > > concentrations to ground and a source of, therefore, VERY
                > positively
                > > > charged cloud tops pre strike. If a storm were more on a frontal
                > > > boundary the EMF extremes, the ion concentrations, would find
                > much
                > > > easier equilibriums.
                > > >
                > > > My view is the cirrus must be sustained in incredible ways, and
                > that
                > > > explains some of the outrageous rainfalls and tornado activity
                > that
                > > > has resulted. The strike activity in Texas has been very
                > interesting
                > > > to watch for about two weeks now.
                > > >
                > > > Yet the Doran waves have had difficulty reaching Arizona, given
                > the
                > > > EMF condition, very positive, of the north Sea of Cortez.
                > > >
                > > > When Allison flooded Texas last year about the same time as it is
                > > > being flooded now, it was the product of a tropical storm, or a
                > warm
                > > > core low. In this instance, the flooding is per an upper low.
                > > >
                > > > Last year, the W. GOM was completely covered w/ cirrus and the
                > > > surface winds moved from the middle of the GOM to the low--
                > inducting
                > > > EMF for cirrus. The low sucked all that moisture in the E. GOM
                > into
                > > > Texas. Right now, the dry air portion of the E. GOM has winds
                > moving
                > > > essentially west to east, inducting against cirrus and providing
                > > > upper air balances for negative EMF in the ionosphere for the
                > charges
                > > > to enhance cirrus in the upper atmosphere. The heat and
                > convection
                > > > is local but the EMF source of the movement of cirrus to provide
                > such
                > > > balances that cause this rain are also based in the E. GOM. This
                > is
                > > > all electrical.
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > > > Lately some of the descriptions being given of what is
                > going on
                > > > that
                > > > > you are describing, have been more understandable. I think you
                > are
                > > > > describing something. I am not convinced that a whole enough
                > > > picture is
                > > > > being painted to allow people to decide where to measure and
                > what
                > > > it can
                > > > > tell us.
                > > >
                > > > Now that I know a little more about you I will re post some of
                > the
                > > > conversations I have had w/ Alan, a systems electrician. It gets
                > > > pretty mathy and it breaks down, I think, in ways you will
                > appreciate.
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > > I believe the SE and its interaction is what you need to really
                > > > > have a picture that completes the whole pattern of what is
                > happening
                > > > > electrically.
                > > >
                > > > I agree. What I wanted to comment on is there are Dr. Gray
                > > > statistics as to 500 mb winds over Greenland and near the Pac NW
                > that
                > > > are TS intellegant for the following season. I will have more
                > > > comments later. But for now, the key issue is going to be the
                > > > insulative properties of the air and how that defines things in
                > terms
                > > > of strikes and Schumann resonances--and IR balances and what is
                > then
                > > > feed back from that. What you may be hitting on will have to do
                > with
                > > > how EMF get organized and why the induction works in a
                > directional
                > > > manner . . .
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > > I have tossed out static electricity a long time ago. All
                > > > > electricity is coming from somewhere and going along a path
                > which
                > > > will
                > > > > eventually find it retracing its paths. The main path is from
                > and
                > > > back
                > > > > to the Sun, for all of the planets of our solar system. It is
                > NOT
                > > > > CMEjections. It is far more steady in its current or CME would
                > > > control
                > > > > it instead of the other way around.
                > > >
                > > > I don't disagree. HOWEVER, the SE controls the organization of
                > the
                > > > field and the particles in it, not the particles in it. The
                > > > particles impact the cirrus, which impacts the convection,
                > strikes,
                > > > and so forth--so you have a feedback impact, whereas the SE is in
                > > > less flux relative to WEATHER. Climate may be another thing
                > > > (timescales), BUT at the end of the day the biosphere wins,
                > because
                > > > if it did not, we would not be hear rapping about this.
                > > >
                > > >
                > > > It turns the world on its axis, it
                > > > > powers the weather jets, it heats the center of the earth,
                > etc.
                > > > > Maybe later, Walter
                > > > > I didn't know you asked that question. I also did not feel
                > that
                > > > you
                > > > > read enough of my materials to even be interested in what I was
                > > > saying. I
                > > > > did not get feedback on a lot of things I wrote and decided
                > that you
                > > > > didn't respond because you had no input nor questions, or you
                > > > didn't get
                > > > > it. It also has occurred to me that we both are trying to sell
                > > > > electricity as a foundational force that most scientists, don't
                > know
                > > > > enough about to begin to think in its terms. needed to do if
                > there
                > > > is to
                > > > > be successful challenging and changing of the current
                > Scientific
                > > > attitude
                > > > > toward electricity.
                > > >
                > > > We have common ground for sure. I don't think, however, that EMF
                > are
                > > > THE modulating force by and of themselves. Instead, it is EMF
                > > > modulated by the biosphere . . .
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > > >
                > > > > On Fri, 05 Jul 2002 16:25:41 -0000 "pawnfart" <mike@u...>
                > writes:
                > > > > If you want to unsubscribe, I am not sure you did it
                > correctly.
                > > > But
                > > > > that isn't my question.
                > > > >
                > > > > My question I asked before, unanswered, is what is your PhD?
                > What,
                > > > > IOW, do you teach?
                > > > >
                > > > > ++++++++
                > > > >
                > > > > Here is a specific comment from last year where a substantive
                > > > > discusssion did occur on another bb regarding EMFs and what is
                > > > > discussed here. I posed it to B-1 and we didn't get to far.
                > This
                > > > is
                > > > > the type of question I was hoping someone like you could help
                > us
                > > > out
                > > > > with but it appears that you aren't who you say you are:
                > > > >
                > > > > (quoting B-1 solar CME data):
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > > Solar wind speed : 664.5 km/sec Solar wind density : 5.3
                > protons/cc
                > > > > Solar wind pressure : 3.9 nPa
                > > > >
                > > > > <SNIP>
                > > > >
                > > > > Me again:
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > > "What I think you should note more then anything is the proton
                > > > stream
                > > > > from the sun, because these are particles that will be sorted
                > by
                > > > > SSTs. "
                > > > >
                > > > > Alan from OZ writes:
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > > "Mike what I want you to note, is just how small this flux of
                > > > protons
                > > > > appears to be to this dimbo technician. And if this is the
                > solar
                > > > wind
                > > > > before hitting the earth's surface, then presumably not all of
                > > > these
                > > > > charges even make it to the earth.
                > > > >
                > > > > ***I really do need a physicist's comment here, **** if i=q/t,
                > > > (where
                > > > > i = current in amps, & q = quantity of electric charges in
                > > > Coulombs)
                > > > > and if the electrical charge on a electron is about 1.602 x 10^-
                > 19
                > > > > coulombs, then we need to move: 1 / 1.602 x 10^-19C per sec to
                > pass
                > > > > 1Amp of current. Or 6.24 x 10^18 electrons must be moved for a
                > > > > current of 1A.
                > > > >
                > > > > The solar wind protons moving in a "tube" of space of csa 1cm^2
                > @
                > > > > 664. km/s above would only move 5.3 x 664.5 x 1000m charges, or
                > > > 3.52
                > > > > x 10^6 protons. If this calc. is correct, then you should be
                > able
                > > > to
                > > > > see that this is a *very small* movement of charges/second
                > compared
                > > > > to even 1 ampere. [John L. please comment] {my comment
                > inserted--
                > > > > another poster in the conversation who is a physics head}
                > > > >
                > > > > It seems to me that you are seeing something here that is a
                > form of
                > > > > "number blindness". "
                > > > >
                > > > > Comments? How would the SE organize these charges? SSTs?
                > Strikes
                > > > > caused by convection in relation to current movement in the
                > > > > ionosphere? Induction of currents in the ionosphere from daily
                > > > > expansion and contraction? QBO (50 mb winds of ions that move
                > > > about
                > > > > 90 mph)?
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                > > > > methanehydrateclub-unsubscribe@y...
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
                > > > Service.
                > > > >
                > > > > [Non-text portions


                To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                methanehydrateclub-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



                Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.