PARALLAX · established 1995 · evidence first · no hoaxes · no threats · write the date down

PARALLAX

see it twice.
sightings & case files · the experiencers · cryptozoology · ancient anomalies · esoterica & prophecy · preparedness — an international community since 1995
PARALLAX  »  DEEP POLITICS & BLACK PROJECTS  »  Black Projects & Suppressed Tech  »  HAARP, ELF coupling, and why the "mind control" joke may be the wrong joke
✎ Post Reply   « Black Projects & Suppressed Tech
HAARP, ELF coupling, and why the "mind control" joke may be the wrong joke
Page 3 of 4   «1234»
Occams_Razorback
Resident Skeptic
◆◆◆◆◆
Posts: 16,720
Joined: Apr 1998
From: Chicago, US
#17▸ Posted: 02 Mar 1999, 10:58 MST
Phil, park that unless you can state a testable prediction for this log set.

A claim we can use would be something like frequency, time window, exposed group, unexposed group, and expected difference. If it cannot enter the table, it does not drive the thread.
bring your denominator
Mags_92
Member
◆◆
Posts: 610
Joined: Sep 2000
From: Northumberland, UK
#18▸ Posted: 16 Mar 1999, 11:22 MST
Denominator update: I removed the three nights where the receiver was down or the tape ran out. That leaves 41 observed windows, 9 flagged as coupling candidates.

If we include only nights with confirmed local logging, it drops to 34 windows, 8 candidates. The ratio is still not proof, but it is less fragile than the first pass.
KJ7MAG -- log it or lose it
TESLA_DROPOUT
Member
◆◆◆
Posts: 2,030
Joined: Aug 2000
From: Fairbanks AK, US
#19▸ Posted: 29 Mar 1999, 12:04 MST
A usable prediction has to be stated before the window opens.

Example: between 0200 and 0430 MST, if the heater pattern is present and geomagnetic noise is below our cutoff, then the 7.3 MHz scatter trace should widen by at least 20 percent against the prior two-night median. Anything written after the fact goes in the notes, not the score column.
derive it from Maxwell, not from incense
Hessdalen_Lars
Senior Member
◆◆◆◆
Posts: 5,210
Joined: Apr 1999
From: Trøndelag, NO
#20▸ Posted: 12 Apr 1999, 12:39 MST
What are we using for controls? I want matched nights with similar solar flux, same receiver chain, same antenna orientation, and no known heater schedule.

Also one sham window chosen by someone who does not see the logs until after timestamps are locked.
Project Hessdalen · separate the timed from the remembered
fluoride_Phil
Member
◆◆
Posts: 9,240
Joined: Jun 1999
From: Idaho, US
#21▸ Posted: 25 Apr 1999, 13:18 MST
You are all ignoring the delivery vector. If the same contractors handle water treatment, ionospheric heating, and municipal emergency radios, then the coupling is not just RF.

The nervous system is the receiver.
follow the gland
K7RADIO
Veteran Member
◆◆◆◆◆
Posts: 10,110
Joined: Dec 1998
From: Arizona, US
#22▸ Posted: 08 May 1999, 13:31 MST
Phil, park the water theory. This thread is only for measurable RF and sky-condition claims.

If you have timestamped receiver data, post the counts and method. If not, do not dilute the denominator Mags just cleaned up.
73s and keep your carrier clean.
Occams_Razorback
Resident Skeptic
◆◆◆◆◆
Posts: 16,720
Joined: Apr 1998
From: Chicago, US
#23▸ Posted: 22 May 1999, 14:02 MST
Seconding K7RADIO. The strongest version of this case is narrow: predicted windows, locked logs, comparable controls.

Broad contractor webs make the claim impossible to falsify, which makes it useless for our purposes here.
bring your denominator
QuietHand
Senior Member
◆◆◆◆
Posts: 6,402
Joined: Mar 1999
From: undisclosed, US
#24▸ Posted: 04 Jun 1999, 15:17 MST
Safe logging note: keep raw receiver times, local clock-drift checks, weather notes, and edits in separate sheets. Initial entries should be ink or write-once media, then mirrored.

Do not put names, addresses, or station locations in the public digest. Grid square is enough unless the operator volunteers more.
measure the load
Page 3 of 4   «1234»
✎ Post Reply
PARALLAX · see it twice. · evidence first · write the date down · sources or it didn't happen
all times shown in the poster's local zone