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

EMFs, Gaia--the delta gets a bill for it

Expand Messages
  • Mike Doran
    For readers not following my posts, the stirring of the waters causes conductivity increases and increases or multiplies cloud formation ability. My view is
    Message 1 of 1 , Jun 30, 2003
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      For readers not following my posts, the stirring of the waters
      causes conductivity increases and increases or multiplies cloud
      formation ability. My view is that a tropical storm is essentially a
      point negative ionospheric EMF w/ positive ionosphere surrounding
      that point, causing increased cirrus, uplift, and a surface low.
      Winds then enhance the electrical dynamic and charge separations.
      http://home.att.net/~moonpath48/APOGEE/0625030945.gif
      http://home.att.net/~moonpath48/APOGEE/0626031330.gif
      http://home.att.net/~moonpath48/APOGEE/0627031330.gif
      http://home.att.net/~moonpath48/APOGEE/0630031845.gif

      A few thoughts from looking at the pictures--created by a researcher
      named Steve MacDonald.
      The GOC as I have mentioned is very gaia poor for this time of year,
      relatively speaking. That is, the Colorado has been siphoned off
      so that hardly anything is added to the microbial biosphere there,
      compared to say the Mississippi which has fossil fertilizers and
      huge amounts of water flowing into the GOM, not to mention the river
      and delta lake projects that do who knows what to sed and flow rates.
      BUT as the moon as moved over this region the gravitational wave
      seems to have stirred the waters, and this causes a relative
      increase in the nearby ocean conductivity. How? Stirred waters has a
      greater gas to dissolved gas exchange and that means more electrons
      free for moving electrical currents. Meanwhile, consistent with a
      greater circuitry Chris has evolved . . . and all of this despite a
      gaia poor GOC. This says much on the power of the moon to create
      local conductive waters.
      From a geological timescale standpoint, in the deep past the sun was
      less luminous but the moon closer and tides greater. This may have
      been how some stability has come electrically, at least from a
      chaotic input standpoint. But, as always, what doesn't come by
      random chance gaia modulates toward a living earth.
      This is what Mac would say about his pictures:
      "Tracking the Moon
      It is known that the moon's gravity moves the tides. 1. The force of
      gravity can deform a body that is seeking its own level. 2. It must
      also be able too deform water vapor, a different state of the same
      molecule. 3. It should also be able to deform the land.
      Also the effect of gravity should be relative to the alignment of
      other major gravitational sources like the Sun and Jupiter.
      Observing the path of the moon will help develop an understanding of
      the effect of Newtonian gravity on the environment.
      Also there is a image of the reflection from the sun off the New
      Moon that I can capture sometimes.
      Also the pass of the moon seems to deform the shape of upper level
      circulations.
      conclusion:
      The first three images seem to show a trail of water vapor moving
      northeast along the sun/moon alignment path, indicating that point 2
      may be valid.
      And the New Moon during an active solar storm is a precursor to
      tornados "
      Mac's methodical observational science, like much of climatology,
      lacks what is called a coupling model. That is, a way to couple the
      behaviors of, say, the ocean temperatures and clouds. Meteorology
      and climatology have failed miserably on this topic because these
      disciplines have followed the dusty path of reduction WITHIN a field
      of thermodynamics AWAY from other explanations such as cloud
      formation dynamics and cirrus behaviors--which have ELECTRICAL
      forcings.
      The biological aspect of these EMFs adds an additional layer of
      complexity that shoots down the EMF trained physics heads who have
      reductively tried to solve these problems presented. And if you add
      the politics and the creationists, the level of stupidity sees
      multipliers.
      Mac's observational work is wanting of an explanation. His vapor
      comments are correct (point 2)--BUT it is more than just the force
      of gravity at work here. It is a specific gravitational field, in
      that the sun's and even some of the larger planets are so large and
      distant in relation to the earth that there isn't local turbulence
      associated with fields other than the moon. Again, this becomes
      electrically significant as far as making patterns in both the air
      and oceans that have significant electrical meaning.
      The most significant EMF change, in my reasoned and experienced
      (observational) view is that the oceans are stirred proximate to the
      gravity wave and that causes a significant increase in local
      conductivity in the oceans, which in turn causes healthy cirrus and
      cloud formation EMFs. That is primarily what you are seeing in these
      pictures.
      The air, too, is stirred by gravitational waves, along with the
      water vapor in that air, and the particles in that air, BUT
      turbulence and ambient winds would likely have some counter
      influence here compared to the oceans, given the density differences
      and what that means to gravitational waves. That said, an
      atmospheric tide will have some electrical meaning as far as
      capacitance is concerned in EMF movements between ocean and cloud,
      cloud and ionosphere . . .
      Finally, as always, the EMF observations of chaotic inputs into the
      biosphere is consistent with the modulating outputs observed by
      biological activity. IOWs, for instance, this observation by Mac of
      the influence of the moon is consistent with the observation that
      with dams and major river changes built on the Rio, Colorado and
      Mississippi in the 30s was met with a Dust Bowl . . . and likewise
      CAP and Mexican changes to the Colorado have been met w/ a drought
      in the SW.
      BTW, those of you reasonably skeptical about the coupling
      (electrically) of weather and climate relative to the orbital
      dynamic of the moon check out this link:
      http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/070047197
      Charles Keeling, BTW, is a Scripps prof behind the FIRST CO2
      readings on the Hawaiian Islands on a volcano there. He has
      correlated the moon behavior to cloud and climate behavior, and
      thinks it is over turned tides warming or cooling the atmosphere.
      However, just like he was wrong about CO2 as a green house gas,
      where CO2 is a significant forcing ELECTRICALLY and moves clouds
      accordingly, he is wrong about the causal aspect of the moon
      behavior. These are the types of scientists who are educated in
      thermal fields but unfamiliar w/ biology or EMFs.

      I had coming into this, given Mac's research on the moon's tidal or
      gravity wave, and the proximity to the west of that wave on
      formation and its movement, was what about that gravity wave path
      across Tropical Storm Bill.
      One of the things Mac has observed is when the gravity wave is SOUTH
      of the storm it tends to do well.
      It may be that a gravity wave and the winds in a tropical storm
      conflict in terms of conductivities and organization. So instead of
      intensifying the storm to the east as the moon moved that way, it
      forced the storm on a more northerly track, weakened it, and caused
      more ambient winds and the storms own churning to impact
      conductivities more than the moon's influence. This discussion is in
      the world of speculation and observation, real time.
      BUT, I have to say, after following Mac's discussion that there is
      no way in my mind now that you can ignore the moon as a tropical
      storm forcing and overall climate impacting variable--and its
      primary significance is conductivity relating to stirred or
      overturned oceans. This goes hand in hand, again, with the Keeling
      Whorf climate research:.
      Last night the strike data respecting TS Bill showed shorting over
      the center (which indicates relative EMF INSTABILITY), for the most
      part, BUT extremely heavy strike activity to the north and sides of
      the storm, which should cause surface winds to draw the storm north.
      The solar wind was EXTREMELY elevated during the all of this, as
      David reported here.
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/methanehydrateclub/message/1833
      This indicates in my view that as this storm moves ashore over the
      near Mississippi delta there will be extreme rain from it. The GOM
      is stirred by the moon and fair weather and we are in the midst of a
      strong CME.
      SOx emissions from volcanic activity remain low. That means the
      phase change temperatures for cirrus remain high and storms tend to
      stall and flood more, do better over land as they fall.
      Another Allison? Mmmm. To watch and see. Heavy rain reports are in
      already.
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.