Global Climate Change, natural,
inadvertent and planned controls some unsung concepts.
By Dr Chris Barnes, Bangor Scientific and
Educational Consultants. E-mail scienceconsultants@yahoo.co.uk
Internet Publication December 30th
2012 Revised 1st January
2013
Homepage for more weather, climate and other
scientific research, http://drchrisbarnes.co.uk
Abstract
Anthropogenic
CO2 increase as the prima facia cause of global warming and climate and
weather changes per se is briefly disputed.
A very brief review of basic climate drivers is presented. Contrail and
aviation cirrus changes are highly relevant in climate change and by a quirk of
nature involving changed solar irradiance, lower geomagnetism and more GCR
and/or aircraft design they may now actually be cooling rather than warming the
climate. Their ability to show up in infra red
satellite images may proof to be essential tool in future geo-engineering
efforts harnessing steered AGWS.
Ironically, on the other hand there is a danger that anthropogenic
infrasound sources such as, for example, wind turbines may actually be warming
the climate by action in the ionosphere. It is seen as imperative that climate
scientists come to understand the global electric circuit and in particular the
unsung concepts of Rydberg ionospheric microwave generation, electromagnetic
Ozone control and AGW modes. All are critically important modes of energy
coupling of ionosphere to lower atmosphere and lithosphere coupling and some
AGW coupling in the reverse sense to what they are used to. Subtle AGW modes
may be driven from the magnetosphere and liable to anthropogenic modulation. In
chaotic weather systems even tiny changes in downward propagating AGWS might
impact jet streams, cloud formation and general weather systems. A possible issue is raised which is that AGW
modulation may already be unintentionally be occurring a result of our 50 and
60 Hz power systems and as a result of upward propagating wind turbine
infrasound. Ionospheric heaters like
HAARP, EISCAT and SURA might one day be able to be used in beneficial
geo-engineering both for factors such as microwave induced cooling hydrology
management and weather system steering.
Introduction
There are few on our planet of whatever persuasion
either scientists or lay people who would deny that there have been recent
dramatic changes in the world’s climate and for that matter their local
weather. For example
2012 has just been declared Britain’s wettest year ever [1].
What remains in much stronger dispute is to how
much such changes are representative of a global warming trend, whether such warming ,if any, continues or has halted temporarily or has
permanently ceased and finally, what is the driver of such changes.
Also it is required to know is all our recent
bizarre weather event and weather patterns simply linked to warming or are
there other forces at play. The favourite villain of the peace accounting for
all or most of this amidst climate scientists appears to be anthropogenic
carbon dioxide. More jovial but equally
as probable cows farting in fields has also been muted by some. There are at least twenty dissenting
International Scientists who dismiss global warming as being due to
anthropogenic grounds [2].
The present author disputes the CO2 hypothesis for
numerous reasons. For example, CO2 is a narrower band absorber and the earth is
a black body radiator. Furthermore, most of CO2 absorption spectra overlaps
that of water vapour which has the potential to be a greenhouse gas some 350
times stronger than CO2 yet is rarely mentioned by traditional climate
scientists. Yet furthermore, the present
author has recently shown that aviation appears to produce a much more accurate fit as a driver of warming during the period 1940-2000
than does CO2 and of course aviation produces contrails and a special class of
cirrus cloud [3],[4].
Perhaps the piece de resistance, the UK Met Office
have very recently released data indicating that global warming appears
to have been on hold for some 16 years or so, whereas the concentration of
atmospheric CO2 continues to rise [5]. The present author has postulated [3] that due to recent changes in
aircraft engine design; the nature of aircraft cirrus itself may have changed
or be changing.
Warming or cooling there are only four real known
parent drivers for change. These are
anthropogenic change, tectonic change (volcanism and earth quakes) and solar
change (luminosity and emissions) and GCR (Galactic Cosmic Ray Events). The
main purpose of this work is to point out that there are unsung routes for
anthropogenic change which really need bringing to the forefront of the climate debate. Furthermore, that there can only be a proper
understanding of climate and weather behaviour if all the processes in the
ionosphere and atmosphere and their intimate coupling are appreciated and
understood. Climate scientists all too
often just focus on parameterised clouds and planetary albedo. If more of a multi-disciplinary approach is
adopted it may be possible to see how processes at the
ionosphere-troposphere interface influence weather and climate and to develop
and possibly even to develop safer routes for geo-engineering if it is needed
in the future without having to resort to stratospheric seeding.
Ionosphere/ Troposphere
coupling
All energy from the sun and GCR comes into the
troposphere and lithosphere via the ionosphere.
An almost complete model has been provided by Simoes
et al [6].
Figure 1: Ionosphere / Troposphere /Lithosphere
coupling model due to Simoes.
Climate scientists often point out how
anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions cause or ought to cause warming and how
volcanoes might cause cooling by stratospheric seeding. Some
are loathe or reluctant to accept that variations in
Solar input or GCR’S might be just as relevant if not more so. Then again the
sun doesn’t pay tax does it? Recently
Voronin and Segei [7] have brought together a brand new
climate model combining the effect of solar irradiance, geomagnetic activity
and GCR as triggers and modulators of a microwave radio optical process
involving Rydberg atoms in the ionosphere the interactions of all three which
appears to change global cloud cover in a manner which elegantly explains
global temperature change in decadal and recent times. Maybe Voronin’s
hypothesis will also be shown to account for recent changes in the behaviour of
aircraft contrails and aviation cirrus too?
Warming or cooling aside, one of
the strangest behaviours in recent climate change has been the erratic
behaviour of hurricanes and cyclones, increased bouts of tornados and the
abnormal southerly deviation of the North Atlantic 300mb jet stream.
Proponents of anthropogenic carbon warming would
explain these anomalies by simply stating that warming releases more water
vapour into the environment. The
present author would retort that so does aviation in the form of clouds and
aerosol which have tremendous potential for warming. But in any event can the
level of warming and water alone really wreak the havoc we are witnessing. Or is it AGWS (acoustic gravity waves) which
are the vehicle?
In any event the present author also feels in order
to fully understand these processes a more complete model than the above needs
to be developed. Only then will we fully
comprehend the complexity and interplay of the processes involved and
ultimately how to safely harness them to the benefit of our planet and human
kind.
A more complete model for
atmospheric coupling
Besides the microwave model of Voronin,
two-way AGW coupling is thought by the present author to be equally important.
Einaudi et al (1978) [8] first pointed out the importance of
gravity waves in the troposphere at a mesosphere and microsphere level. In fact gravity
waves of all kinds of magnitudes and periods are found throughout the
atmosphere at all heights. Einaudi et al state
that gravity waves have the potential to ‘transport and re-distribute
momentum, angular momentum , energy and matter’ further ‘they can play an important role in
clear air turbulence, rotating storms and diffusion processes’ further ‘in
various atmospheric processes that involve phase change and latent heart
release such as initiation of convective storms and squall lines etc. because
their time and spatial scales are appropriate.’
Critically they further go on to state that ‘gravity waves do not need to have
a large amount of energy of their own; they can be viewed as the vehicle through which large amounts of energy and
momentum are redistributed in an organised fashion.’
Moreover, it has recently been shown that there is
a two way propagation of AGWS (acoustic gravity waves between the ionosphere
(thermosphere) and TS (troposphere/stratosphere)[9-12] and that these come under strong magnetospheric and solar influence. Furthermore
it is known that earth’s power grids significantly influence the magnetosphere [13, 14]. Furthermore there
are approximately 20 incredibly powerful ionspheric
heaters on earth all doing a similar thing
[15]. Furthermore
intentional and inadvertent infrasound signals can cause hotpots in the
ionosphere [13], also changing the
reflectivity of AGWS. Furthermore
there are numerous organisations and countries throughout the world with
weather control programmes [16]
although it is not presently known if these intentionally employ AGWS. The author has attempted to add these
sources and coupling into the Simoes’ model. The result is shown below.
Figure 2: Simoes
model modified according to Barnes 2012.
In figure 2 the processes added by Barnes have been
shown in blue. Permanent processes which are always operating at some point on
or above the planet are shown surrounded by solid lines. Transient processes
are shown by dotted lines. Earthquakes
(EQ) have been added as an example of a natural process not included by Simoes because they do impact on surface radioactivity and
aerosols and on ULF generation. Furthermore as evidence that Earthquakes ought to be
including the present author has seen jet stream shifts associated with
earthquakes [17]. Earthquakes release stored energy into the
over- lithosphere environment just as burning fossil fuels releases stored
energy. The remaining abbreviations are
as follows:
GCR = Galactic Cosmic Ray; SPE = Solar Photon
Event; TLE = Trans Luminous Event ( upwards rising
lightning); ULF = Ultra low frequency ;
VLF = Very low frequency ; MHD =
Magneto hydrodynamic; IAR = Ionospheric Alven
Resonator ( ion –acoustic type wave interactions) and finally, AGW = Acoustic
Gravity Wave.
Note that the anthropogenic main processes which
give rise to clouds and aerosols have also been in indicated including; ships,
aircraft and industry (includes agriculture, power stations domestic fuel
consumption and all other vehicles).
Known methods for modifying clouds and weather have
also been included, including; seeding and use of lasers and ionisers. Lasers can now be used to impact weather by
creating/diverting lightning (Kasparian et al) [18].
Under the ULF/VLF category in addition to natural
sources, known anthropogenic sources have been included including ionosphere
heaters both radio frequency and infrasonic types. Under these categories it must not be forgotten
that the worlds’ power grids at 50 and 60 Hz via their harmonic radiation might
be the most significant of all ionosphere heaters [13, 14].
Infrasound and Wind Turbines
Natural infrasound from waves and tides, earthquakes, volcanoes [19], storm systems [20]and the aurora [23]is
found in all parts of the atmosphere and gives rise to short period AGWS . Such
infrasound may be an important source of heating in the ionosphere [21,22]. Long distance propagation of infrasound form
artificial sources has been noted with reflections in the upper atmosphere, see
Liszka 1974 [24]. Blanc (1985) has stated that infrasound from
whatever source, natural or artificial can produce ‘ionsopheric disturbances by collisional effect.’[25].
As the present author is aware is upwelling
infrasound from wind turbines at the blade crossing frequency has to date been
totally overlooked yet this may even prove to be a critical factor in climate
change. Other anthropogenic infrasound
from ships, aircraft and mass transport systems may also have a part to
play. As infrasound radiates upwards in
the atmosphere the lower frequencies are selectively amplified by rarefaction
of the air and may give rise to hot spots in the thermosphere, (Lastovicka et al 2006)
[26] perturb temperature and electron densities by up to 10% (Krasnov and Drobzheva 2005) [27], cause temperature oscillations
in the mesopause (Pilger
and Bittner 2009) [28] and can even
generate light and pulsed electromagnetic waves (Aramyan
2008) [29]. If the sound is in the form of a shock wave
or impulse then exponential amplification with
focusing of the rays at mesospheric altitudes is to be expected. http://asadl.org/jasa/resource/1/jasman/v95/i4/p1830_s1?isAuthorized=no. Wind turbine noise is known to have a ‘pulse
like character’ http://www.stephanion.gr/aiolika/Effects_of_the_wind_profile_at_night.pdf
it remains to be seen how much if any influence it is having either directly on
the ionosphere, hence indirectly on our weather and climate.
In general then, from the
available literature, acoustic and infrasound may cause similar effects to HF
plasma heating [30, 31, and 32]. The possibility of injecting energy from
space (satellites) in the form of laser beams or EMR ((microwave)
electromagnetic radiation is also shown) [33].
Under EMR we should also consider the natural solar microwave bursts and auroral microwave
processes and Rydberg microwave processes stimulated by VLF Heating (Voronin and Sergei 2010)
[34].
AGW Coupling
Most accepted models of ionosphere to lower
atmosphere coupling are based purely on electrical coupling involving the
global DC and AC electric circuits. What
is over looked is the notion of AGW coupling.
Simoes has pointed out the notion of upwards
AGW propagation during earthquakes and from storm systems. Claerbout
(1967)[35] has noted that pressure
fluctuations associated with the jet stream (AGW modes) radiate into the
thermosphere and are strongly reflected by any temperature gradients present.
Temperature gradients might be changed by particle precipitation or by
infrasound injection for instance hotspots have been found in the ionosphere in
regions where mountain infrasound is present. Based on the above one wonders if
upwardly propagating infrasound from wind turbines might cause a similar
effect. Prikrly
et al have pointed out that at times of high solar wind speed after solar
flaring AGWS are also generated in the auroral electrojet and crucially may impact extra-tropical cyclone
activity [36]. Such downward propagating AGWS are often
associated with a southward IMF. It is very interesting to note that the
present author has noted that the magneto-acoustic effect some individuals
perceive as the Hum is also associated
with such an IMF condition [37]. The
Hum seems to have been more prevalent in recent years of climatic change. Indeed Prikrly et al goes on to point out that banding in
mesoscale cloud structure appears to be due to downward AGWS and that in the
autumn and winters of both hemispheres high level cloud cover shows a small but
significant decrease in response to a declining solar wind velocity. Clairemedi et al
(1985) have observed a huge bi-dimensional wave structure at the auroral mesopause [38]. For example on similar lines, Bucha and Bucha (1998) have shown
a geomagnetic link with climate forcing and atmospheric circulation and Thejl et al (2003) have shown a geomagnetic link to the North
Atlantic Oscillation [39]. Solar influences on circulation have also
been noted by Georgiava et al.[40]. Lastovicka () has
shown correlated effects of geomagnetic storms in different parts of the
atmosphere [41]. Danilov and Lastovicka
note enhanced particle precipitation during geomagnetic storms [42] as of particular relevance to their
link with weather and climate. Most importantly Courtilliot
et al (2007) [43] notes strong
connections between the earth’s magnetic field and climate right up until the
commencement of the latest fast warming period circa 1980. Courtilliot
has also noted cosmic rays as climate drivers but does not dismiss any other
single contributory cause.
The present author proposes here that by bringing
together all of the above findings and accepting two- way AGW (vertical)
coupling into the global atmosphere equation one can begin to see how solar and
geo-magnetic influence might modulate cloud and storm formation either directly
by wind shear amplification or via changes in atmospheric conductivity and even
steer jet streams. This gives rise to a new mechanism for these critically significant processes in climate and weather
which may have been previously overlooked.
The next question to be asked, is if we accept
these geomagnetic processes are so relevant to weather and climate from both
perspectives of AGW modulation/generation and microwave modulation/generation
are they capable of coming under any anthropogenic influence which could either be relevant in
inadvertent climate change seen to date or in any potential future
geo-engineering of weather and climate for the better? Guglielmi and Zotov (2012) [44]
have noted just such an effect which they describe as a ‘hourmark’
effect or synchronous influence of the technosphere
on the regime of electromagnetic oscillations in the cosmic plasma and on
seismic activity. Next, exactly what are the influences concerned? Parrot and Zaslavski
(1996) [45] identify several types
of wave influences coming from the earth’s surface towards the ionosphere.
Firstly, there are anthropogenic AGWS from explosions, space flight, and
aircraft flight, especially supersonic. Next there are electromagnetic waves
across a wide frequency spectrum, including those generated by power line
harmonic radiation strongly observed by satellite receivers over industrial areas, ground based communication, navigation and
ionospheric heater transmitters, the latter purposefully designed to change
natural ionosphere and magnetosphere parameters. A large variety of physical processes are
observed including wave-wave and
wave-particle interactions and particle precipitation and chemical changes due
to changes in ionisation.
The next question is, at which times and when and
which anthropogenic influence, particularly from ELF/VLF sources is strongest?
C.G. Park (1976) [46] notes that
‘manmade VLF noise plays an important role in the post –storm (geomagnetic) of
energetic electrons’, i.e. it alters the particle precipitation process, see
figure 2. Power line harmonics of 50 Hz
and 60 Hz are absolutely ubiquitous worldwide and Park and Helliwell
(1978) point out that these disturb the magnetosphere out to ‘many earth
radii.’ So climate scientists have been blaming our energy use for climate
change viz a viz CO2 but
maybe our electromagnetic pollution of the magnetosphere is just as relevant?
There are now approximately twenty known extremely
powerful (some up to 1GW ERP) so-called ‘ionospheric heater’ transmitter
installations worldwide. Perhaps the
most well known, although not the most powerful, is
HAARP in Alaska, followed by EISCAT in Norway and SURA in Russia. The declared purposes of HAARP are to analyze the
ionosphere and investigate the potential for developing ionospheric enhancement
technology for radio communications and surveillance. Further
stated applications of HAARP and HIPAS [46a]
made by Wong (1999) were global communications using ELF, ozone depletion
remediation and control of atmospheric CO2.
Cohen and Inan
(2012) [47] have in a satellite study
shown that VLF signals ‘strongly impact’ the radiation belts and that such
trans-ionospheric modification as declared above is happening for at least one
known VLF transmitter in the heated region.
Indeed form the microwave perspective; Voronin and Sergei (2010) have stated that ‘transmitter
work’ might account for 10% of all microwave generation form Rydberg states.
World power grid systems are not actively
controlled other than in frequency and load management and their influence on
the ionosphere and ultimately on weather and climate will be linked via other
geo-physical and space weather processes.
Unlike the early VLF submarine transmitters, HAARP
does not radiate VLF/ELF directly but sends modulated HF waves into the
ionosphere, usually but not exclusively the Polar Electrojet,
where they produce the former by non-linear processes. Also HAARP was developed
with a form of mitigation in mind. But
this was not climate mitigation, it was mitigation of another kind to try and
provide more efficient radio and military radio communications at times when
solar influence would cause huge impracticalities. HAARP, EISCAT and SURA has allowed the
generation of phenomenal wealth of
scientific results and publications.
Whereas the present author has read a great deal of this work just a few
examples are required to illustrate the important principals and proposals
which need to be discussed here. The first important principal has been
documented by Golkowski et al (2011)
[48] and is that under the
right conditions systems like HAARP can produce magnetospheric
amplification particularly in geomagnetically quiet
conditions following a geomagnetic disturbance this concurs with the earlier
findings of Park for VLF noise in
general. Leyser
and Wong (2009) have stated that ‘powerful
electromagnetic (EM) waves (of the HAARP kind) [49] can exert well-defined influence on the atmosphere,
ionosphere, and magnetosphere. These active EM interactions can provide
spatiotemporal information on the near-Earth space environment (geospace). Objectives include remote monitoring and
controlling of a wide range of parameters of geospace,
controlling properties of the ionosphere and magnetosphere, as well as
interaction with large-scale natural energy sources. In addition,
applications such as mitigation of atmospheric pollutants and solar power
satellites are discussed. Studies of EM wave interactions also contribute to
the knowledge of anthropogenic effects in the geospace
environment, such as the increasing use of EM radiation’.
Could ionospheric heating ever achieve its stated aims? From a
perspective of creating or modifying AGW waves it looks as though the answer is
in the affirmative. Perhaps most
significantly of all,
and proving one of the above sated objectives, Kavanagh et al
(2006) [50] have observed artificial modulation of radar
echoes from polar mesospheric clouds under the action of HF heating and deduced
the cloud descent is indicative of HF
induced gravity wave effects. Regarding microwave generation, this might be
expected according to Carlson Jr. (1993) [50a] and certainly the
microwave environment of the mesosphere has been noted to change under impact
of high power radio waves [50b].
Eastlund and Jenkins [50c] have separate proposals for trying to disrupt the formation
of tornadoes by employing microwaves beamed directly from space
satellites.
Finally regarding Voronin’s
hypothesis, this is very new and all the experimental evidence appears to be in
the Russian literature and language.
There is however lots of evidence that the Sun itself produces microwave
bursts correlated with its X-ray emission, for example Parks and Winckler (1996) http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1969ApJ...155L.117P. Undoubtedly there is some kind of
geomagnetic influence on the microwave environment of the ionosphere as borne
out from more than 50 years observations of radio
scintillations and more recently on scintillations of the ubiquitous GPS signal
(Reggiani 2005) [50d]. If Voronin’s
hypothesis is independently verified it will in this present author’s opinion
prove to be the biggest singly relevant discovery in Climate Science of Modern
Times.
Space Based Solar Power and
Microwave Satellite Beams
Some have suggested a scheme to beam the Sun’s
energy to earth for power generation using microwaves as a link. This goes back to the 1970’s http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_solar_power. In the light of the above revelations the
author is grateful that the stated completion date for this project is still
several decades away. The author has serious reservations about the safety of
such projects although concedes that transitory use of microwave beams in
weather modification might be very useful.
A recent report by Robinson et al (Leicester University) highlights some
of the uncertainties but again in the onion of the present author light of Voronin’s work we should look very seriously and cautiously
at this.
Alternative to Voronin’s Hypothesis proposed by present author
Very recently indeed it has been noticed that the
density of atmospheric ozone in a region of intense HF heating depletes on a
transient basis during the heating but recovers afterwards, Kulikov
(2010). Solar modulated geomagnetic
activity has been shown relevant in climate change in recent and decadal
timescales http://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1163&context=theses.
There is conflicting evidence in the literature as to whether geomagnetic
effects reduce ozone by depletion or by redistribution, one such example of the
former is the paper by de Petris et al (1991) http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1991AnG.....9..381D. Clearly if ozone is reduced either by solar
influence, GCR influence or by anthropogenic influence, UV penetration will
increase and planetary warming will ensue.
Ozone linked AGW hypothesis
describe ozone (associated with airglow) as a
‘tracer of short period gravity waves’.
In the mind of the present author it is easy to see how ozone
fluctuations can be the producer of such waves. Quite simply put; with temperature gradient
comes pressure gradient. These can
either be in accordance with auroral flutter or
geomagnetic pulsation or synthetically created by HF heating of appropriate
modulation scheme.
Weather and climate
geo-engineering a proposal
Since human kind’s activities on our planet are
having some undeniable influence on our weather and climate and since we have
no control over the sun or GCRS it is yet possible the two may combine in an as
yet unpredictable way in the future to favourably maintain a status quo or to bring a tendency towards warming or
cooling of our environment which could of course be classified as slight,
moderate or catastrophic depending on rate and feedbacks. Eastlund (2008) [51] has discussed the use of narrowband earth or space based
microwave beams directly on rain droplets or atmospheric oxygen and atmospheric
heating to influence rotating storm systems.
Over and above this, the
realisation that natural and anthropogenic microwaves generated in our
ionosphere (as elegantly explained and experimentally tested by S.V.Avakyan 2010) by might also
have the potential to warm or cool the planet by direct influence on water
vapour clusters and cloud condensation nuclei depending on frequency is indeed
exciting and novel. So new is this model that some may need persuading then
they should refer to Klein (1978) on use of Radiant Energy for Fog Dispersal
and Carlon (1979) ‘Do clusters contribute to the
infrared red absorption spectrum of water vapour).
If HF ionospheric
heating has the ability to locally reduce ozone this may be essential to
do if we find ourselves tipping towards a new ice age or mini ice age (as forecast by Lanscheidt
2003) http://multi-science.metapress.com/content/f524m4271487p0u2/ or
even simply to overcome the effects of reduced UV by global cloudiness
and ozone emissions due to increases in
aviation, the former actually seen to be an advantage by Brunelle
Yeung http://dandelion-patch.mit.edu/afs/athena/dept/aeroastro/partner/reports/hartman/brunelle-yeung-08.pdf
due to reduced skin cancer but
vehemently disagreed by the present author due to reduced vitamin D3 and
multiple increases in other cancers and illnesses. In this respect famous Geography scholars
Bryson and Wendland http://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=Ww3DnCF_KZcC&oi=fnd&pg=PA139&dq=contrails+reduce+vitamin+d&ots=SBFyQaPt2m
have previously
published work in agreement with the present author.
Similarly the realisation that
simultaneously using ionospheric heating we may have the ability to tweak
atmospheric AGWS and influence the paths of jet streams, and weather systems
seems to belong in the realms of science fiction yet it could soon become a
reality. It will be also be critically essential to
quickly investigate and assess the ionospheric and climatic effects of
infrasound from wind turbines which are populating our countryside at an
alarming rate. From the theory discussed
above it would seem that acoustic signals can augment microwave production by
Rydberg atoms active in geomagnetic storms.
Possibly then vertically propagating infrasound form the world’s many
hundreds of thousands of wind turbines may be having a WARMING effect on our
planet?
In the mind of the
present author this opens up possibilities to employ HF heaters like
HAARP and EISCAT etc. in a purposeful manner to attempt to influence weather and ultimately
climate including hydrology by means of AGW interaction on clouds, weather
systems and jet streams along the lines
of the interactions highlighted herein above.
Interestingly, modern aviation could play a part in testing the AGW
interaction hypothesis. Modern high bypass turbofan engines with cooler
emissions tend to produce more persistent contrails which not only show up on
earth but can also be detected in space by infra red
satellite technology. The present author
has already noticed recognisable patterns such as KH instability and mountain
waves in such contrails and aviation cirrus.
It is proposed that by purposely seeding such contrails or cirrus to
persist for suitably given times in a specific region of the atmosphere of
interest could be used as a powerful a probe for the visualisation of AGW
dynamics from space or even from earth under clear sky conditions or with
appropriately developed radar or lidar systems. It would be then far easier to visualise the
effects of RF heating first hand.
Of course it may be that such systems are already
unknowingly and unwittingly and unintentionally together with PLHR procuring
such interactions and in turn these interactions may possibly account for some
of the weather we see today. For
example, before HF Heaters came on the scene, the only comparable high power
transmitters were the Russian HF over horizon radars no longer active and once located in the
now Ukriane.
When these radars were operational the USA had its worst ever droughts
and reversed jet stream flows and the UK had its 1976 record hot summer.
Clearly, a lot more research is
needed but if successful synthetic RF generated AGW/Ozone/ microwave
intervention might be able to be used to mitigate adverse climate effects in a
manner which can easily be trialled and turned on and off. This
would be in the present author’s opinion a much safer bet than stratospheric
seeding which could potentially bring about an ice age or screen out too much
UVB radiation. Success of course
never comes with guarantee and we should perhaps remember that we would be trying
to tease and tame a chaotic system. It
may be that one heater working alone is insufficient to cause much effect and
international co-operation would most certainly be required in such a project for the
fear that otherwise the potential for ‘weather wars’ might ensue.
Some non-scientists have already made ridiculous
claims particularly concerning HAARP as a machine of terror and mass
destruction. Even a speaker in the
Russian Duma is alleged to have made a statement concerning the destructive potential
of HAARP [52]. Interestingly, however the Russian
equivalent of the HAARP system, namely, SURA is thought to emit a considerably
greater ERP [53]. If the public
domain document ‘Weather as a Force Multiplier’ circulating on the internet is to
be believed then the US military may appear to have stated an aim of being able
to ‘own the weather by the year 2025.’[54] Still, whatever, an image of Angels with
their hands or wings outstretched is usually associated with Harps and the
former are a sign of salvation. Fitting
then they are now quite often seen in skies as product of ‘hole-punch’ in
aviation cirrus. Are they trying to give us message? HF heating started out as a merely an
advanced radio communication technology but might finish up a salvation and
solution for our world’s climatic conundrum.
Left: hole punch clouds once very rare.
Acknowledgements
The author wishes to acknowledge his wife and son
for valuable discussions on the possibility of weather control and also Mr.
Peter Van Doorn of the UK Tornado and Storm Research
Organisation.
References
3. http://www.drchrisbarnes.co.uk/AIRWARM.htm
4. http://www.drchrisbarnes.co.uk/Climate2.htm
6. http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20120011991_2012011709.pdf
7. http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010EGUGA..12.8521V
8.
Einaudi, F.; Lalas, D. P.; Perona, G. E. Springer (1978) The role
of gravity waves in tropospheric processes (1978)
9. http://www.dtic.mil/docs/citations/AD0661650
10. http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/1987/JA092iA07p07651.shtml
11. http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003ESASP.535..371P
13. Surveys in Geophysics 17(1) pp67-100 1996.
14. C.G. Park and R.A. Helliwell,’Magnetospheric Effects
of Power Line Radiation’ Science 19
(200), Number 4343 p727, 1978.
15. http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2012/2012JA017992.shtml
16. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sTLZn-_VN8E
17. http://www.drchrisbarnes.co.uk/publications.htm
18. http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2008-04/osoa-lte041008.php
19. http://pubs.usgs.gov/pinatubo/tahira/
20. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/qj.421/abstract
21. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364682609000546
22. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0021916977901520
23. http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2005/2005GL023188.shtml
24. http://asadl.org/jasa/resource/1/jasman/v56/i5/p1383_s1?isAuthorized=no
25. http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1985AnGeo...3..673B
26. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364682605002579
27. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364682605000647
28. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364682609000546
29. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1134%2FS1054660X08070062?LI=true#page-1
30. http://www.nrcresearchpress.com/doi/abs/10.1139/p60-150#.UOBXZ6x9Sm4
31. http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/1991/91GL01847.shtml
32. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S136468269900125X
34. http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010EGUGA..12.8521V
35. http://oai.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identifier=AD0661650
36. http://www.leif.org/EOS/angeo-27-1-2009.pdf
37. http://www.drchrisbarnes.co.uk/HUMIMF.html
38. http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1985P&SS...33.1013C
39. http://web.dmi.dk/fsweb/solar-terrestrial/staff/hgl/Pubs/TCG_GRL03.pdf
40. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0273117707006382
41. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0021916995001069
42.
Effects of geomagnetic storms on the ionosphere and atmosphere,
AD Danilov, J Lastovicka -
International Journal of Geomagnetism and …, 2001 - agu.org
43. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0012821X06007667
44. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1134%2FS1069351312050035?LI=true
45. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF01904475?LI=true
46. http://www.agu.org/books/sp/v008/SP008p0772/SP008p0772.shtml
46a. http://proceedings.aip.org/resource/2/apcpcs/485/1/18_1?isAuthorized=no
47. http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2012/2012JA017992.shtml
48. http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2011/2010JA016261.shtml
49. http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2009/2007RG000235.shtml
50. http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2006/2006GL027565.shtml
50a.
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1993AdSpR..13...15C
50b)
Radio Physics and Quantum Electronics 55 1-2, pp51-58, 2012
53. http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010cosp...38.1549S
54. http://csat.au.af.mil/2025/volume3/vol3ch15.pdf