Sounds like someone is waking up.
http://www.eiscouncil.com/EarthEx
http://www.eiscouncil.com/EarthEx
Well they ARE atomic weapons detonated high in the atmosphere so there is no blast damage. I think there are many experts in the field that would disagree with you, including a congressional report from 2008 that we never acted on.EMP weapons are impractical and are not a threat. If they are large enough to actually do anything, they are simply an atomic weapon at that point.
EMP weapons are impractical and are not a threat. If they are large enough to actually do anything, they are simply an atomic weapon at that point.
Saying that we never acted on it is a bit presumptuous. Just because no one told you what the response would be doesn't mean there isn't a plan.Well they ARE atomic weapons detonated high in the atmosphere so there is no blast damage. I think there are many experts in the field that would disagree with you, including a congressional report from 2008 that we never acted on.
Regardless, it doesn't have to come from a weapon. We're overdue for another Carrington event, and one just missed us in 2012.
Oh I'm absolutely sure the plan involves a certain "class" preparing giant bunkers being built with money stolen from the People in order to save themselves while saying eff you to everyone else.Saying that we never acted on it is a bit presumptuous. Just because no one told you what the response would be doesn't mean there isn't a plan.
Were you planning to distribute your "preps" among the masses after the "Day"?Oh I'm absolutely sure the plan involves a certain "class" preparing giant bunkers being built with money stolen from the People in order to save themselves while saying eff you to everyone else.
Were you planning to distribute your "preps" among the masses after the "Day"?
Yeah , I read that book too.
Hopefully the Arks would be populated by the best and brightest, those who would be helpful in restoring us to civilization. but you may have a point.
What book is this?You are right in that That was a good book. It really did open my eyes to a lot of thongs. I In fact would not be shocked As anything is possible.
There won't be for long. I don't remember the intermediate numbers, but in the first 3 months there will be a significant reduction in the population, something on the order of 30%?? But, I do remember the numbers for the end of 1 year, 98%.I think there's simply too many people on Earth for "those folks" to enjoy their secluded future. They'll be overrun, outmanned, possibly outgunned and then dead.
There won't be for long. I don't remember the intermediate numbers, but in the first 3 months there will be a significant reduction in the population, something on the order of 30%?? But, I do remember the numbers for the end of 1 year, 98%.
That's 98% loss. The projections say only 2% of the population will survive the first year. Estimated time to repair grid, 2 years.
.
EMP weapons are impractical and are not a threat. If they are large enough to actually do anything, they are simply an atomic weapon at that point.
Part of the reality is that it wouldn't take an EMP to bring the electric grid down and into a state it would take at least months to fix. There is a fairly recent book out by Ted Kopel called Lights Out that discusses this. It was recommended by a coworker. If I ever finish it, I'll put it in the CFF book club for pay it forward.EMP is for the far right what global warming is to the far left. There is a factual basis for belief in both, but there is also a thick layer of self-serving bullspit on top.
Part of the reality is that it wouldn't take an EMP to bring the electric grid down and into a state it would take at least months to fix. There is a fairly recent book out by Ted Kopel called Lights Out that discusses this. It was recommended by a coworker. If I ever finish it, I'll put it in the CFF book club for pay it forward.
Part of the reality is that it wouldn't take an EMP to bring the electric grid down and into a state it would take at least months to fix. There is a fairly recent book out by Ted Kopel called Lights Out that discusses this. It was recommended by a coworker. If I ever finish it, I'll put it in the CFF book club for pay it forward.
Yes, it could. One of the key premises is that there are just a few critical switches or stations and especially transformers that if you take those out, you will disable a large part of the national system and with no spares and manufacturing all overseas, it would be devastating and take a long time to recover.Well placed bullets could have the same effect. Not sure if anything came of those sub stations that were fired on out in California in one week. Some were saying that it was a test.
Funny how that story never made the mainstream. It was classified as vandalism. Very orchestrated and we'll timed vandalism, with an AK.Well placed bullets could have the same effect. Not sure if anything came of those sub stations that were fired on out in California in one week. Some were saying that it was a test.
I appreciate this information. But, it makes me think of an article I saw that compared American weapons philosophies with Russia. American's are carefully thought out, precise and sophisticated. Russia's are crude and functional.Alllll righty, now...
Not that I'm an expert on EMP weapons, mind you, but there are several factors that have to be gotten just right in order to produce an EMP sufficient to actually affect electrical and electronic systems on the ground.
Also, while low yield fission weapons can produce a significant EMP when compared to thermonuclear (fusion) weapons, their effect is much more localized than larger fusion weapons. So the use of low yield fission weapons would not affect nearly as large of an area. So the overall debilitating effect to the country as a whole would be dramatically reduced.
Also, because low yield fission weapons would produce a smaller effect on the geomagnetic field itself, it's ability to cause damage by current induction in transmission lines is much less pronounced.
Now, when you consider the geographically large nature of the continental United States, the effects of the kinds of weapons North Korea has will not be nearly so wide spread as alarmists would have us fear. Not by a long shot.
Add to this the practicalities of attempting a nuclear EMP attack and there are other significant uncertainties which North Korea would have to overcome. Not saying they can't, but they would have one h*ll of a time doing so and being in any way successful. To be able to most effectively determine all the factors required for a successful EMP attack would require a bit of actual testing of many systems and strategies designed to perfect this kind of attack. And those are easily monitored.
First, they have to get a weapon launched over the United States, at the proper altitude to maximize the effect, under naturally varying conditions. They have to be able to target the weapon's point of detonation to be able to "aim" the EMP effect...because it's not something where the EMP effect is felt immediately under the point of detonation. The EMP pulse is conducted along the geomagnetic field, and given the geographical location of the United States within that magnetic field, that means the area of "EMP impact" would be largely to the South of the point of detonation. So they have to get the weapon at the right altitude under the current natural conditions at that time for the weapon design and type of yield, placed in the right location to correctly "aim" the EMP to their intended target in order to cause maximum damage.
And absolutely NONE of this in any way prevents our ability to take on North Korea in the military conflict that would ensue immediately following the attack. None of our forces are going to be located anywhere near a continental target area, and our major military assets are designed and built with EMP protection. So an EMP attack won't "save" North Korea at all. Pretty much, it'll be the stick poking the hornet's nest.
I appreciate this information. But, it makes me think of an article I saw that compared American weapons philosophies with Russia. American's are carefully thought out, precise and sophisticated. Russia's are crude and functional.
So, this comment from the abstract of the commission report above is misguided?
"A determined adversary can achieve an EMP attack capability without having a
high level of sophistication."
Also, the report references known testing by America and Russia that created EMP effects
even though that was not the intended design.
An EMP doesn't have to come from an enemy, a sufficient solar flare would generate an EMP just as devastating as weapons designed for the task. The event in 2012 would have done so if it had hit us, and it doesn't take fake science and a globalist conspiracy to prove it.EMP is for the far right what global warming is to the far left. There is a factual basis for belief in both, but there is also a thick layer of self-serving bullspit on top.