◆ PARALLAX

Before the next prediction window I want baseline columns for local weather and geomagnetic state: pressure trend, cloud cover, wind at antenna height if available, K index, solar flux, and any visible auroral reports.

If coupling survives those controls, we will have something worth arguing over.

Agreed. Next window gets locked before anyone opens the fresh logs. If the match appears only after we move the clock marks, it goes in notes, not the score column.

I would rather have a dull miss than a dramatic hit assembled after breakfast.

I will post raw window counts tonight: monitored hours, usable receiver time, candidate fades, discarded periods, and ordinary noise periods.

Misses stay in. The denominator is the only thing keeping this from becoming a campfire story with call signs.

Add one sham window chosen before the data are reviewed. Same length, same band, similar solar conditions if possible.

If the alleged heater window and the sham window both look special, we have learned something useful about our instruments and nothing useful about Alaska.

Reminder on scale: field strengths, ionospheric height, propagation path, and receiver chain first. Mind-control claims remain outside this thread unless someone brings a measurable mechanism and a protocol.

Weak RF coupling is hard enough to test without smuggling in brain radio.

Thread result so far: no proof, but a testable lane.

Locked windows, raw logs, controls, sham periods, and weather columns. If HAARP is just an ordinary research facility, this method should help show that. If there is coupling worth noticing, it should survive the same method.