> The demise of the honeybee has been associated with
> electromagnetic radiation...
Really? Well, there was some very wide-eyed
hype spread around in the press for a while, but
it was quickly debunked. I would offer that the
issue has gotten a great deal of attention, but
the claims made have been found to be groundless.
> short pdf file looking into this possibility can be
> downloaded
...and it says for 5 Euros more, they will sell
similar pamphlets with "more information". :)
> HAARP is the abbreviation for a military project
While the US Air Force and US Navy are involved, this is
science without any actual "military" application, unless
one has been watching too many James Bond movies, and
confuses understanding the ionosphere and Aurora with
having some sort of weapons-system implications.
The number of agencies with overlapping oversight
responsibilities is large. The list is here:
http://www.haarp.alaska.edu/haarp/osite.html
With so many civilian "overseers", one can't
really call this a "military project" at all.
> the wattage is extremely high at 3 million Watts
3 million watts is nothing compared to even a typical
thunderstorm. Remember the movie "Back To The Future",
where a single lightning bolt was said to contain
1.2 GigaWatts? Not an exaggeration at all. That would
be 1,200,000,000 watts, 400 times the 3,000,000 watts
HAARP can produce.
Individual "puny looking" lightning bolts commonly carry
100 million watts each. Entire thunderstorm clouds can
make hundreds of such lightning bolts in a half hour.
(It is hard to measure the power of lighting, as it
has a annoying habit of vaporizing the equipment that
measures the lightning. Most estimates are based upon
how much metal can be melted by each bolt that hits
very fat "lightning rod" cables.)
HAARP is laughably puny in terms of wattage. Paranoid
people have accused the project of attempting "weather
control", but HAARP can't even muster up enough power
to make one lousy lightning bolt. (If you do the math,
a table-top "science fair" Tesla coil needs about
1000 watts per foot of "lightning" discharge, and this
is under optimal conditions with a nice fat ground
within a few feet of the toy.)
> HAARP transmits primarily on 2 frequencies: 3.39 MHZ and 6.99 MHZ.
Yeah, right next to the 40 meter and 80 meter ham radio bands.
And this is the big-give away that the HAARP project can't be
harming bees. If it was, there would be a pattern of problems
with bees at locations near various types of transmitters,
such as Ham Radio.
Here's the US frequency allocation chart:
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/osmhome/allochrt.pdf
Remember, the power of any radio signal decreases with the square
of the distance from the broadcasting antenna (the "inverse square
law"), so you can get much more actual RF by being close to a less
powerful transmitter than you can by being even a moderate distance
away from a powerful one.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse-square_law
Just as a practical example, WCBS AM (at 880 kHz) radio in NYC
broadcasts with 50 kilowatts of transmitter power, so here in
NYC, the effective power of WCBS is much much greater than the
effective ("radiated") power of the HAARP project antennas all
the way up in Alaska. The HAARP transmitters may be 60 times
the power of WCBS, but WCBS is right here in town.
As another example, the Coast Guard LORAN-C transmitter at
Station George in Washington state operates at 1.6 million
watts of broadcast power, as have many of the other LORAN-C
transmitters. (LORAN is a pre-GPS navigational scheme for
boats, and has been in use for decades.)
Once again, actually "doing the math" clearly illustrates why
the phrase "Do The Math" is such an appropriate response to
so many extraordinary claims.
****************************************************
* General Information About BEE-L is available at: *
* http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm *
****************************************************
|
