The main point I like to make is that to generate an earthquake that released as much energy as a Tsar Bomb, you dont have to input energy equivalent to this.
Think about a very tall jenga tower. You do a minor flick with your finger at the bottom, and the whole tower collapses releasing orders of magnitude more energy than you put in.
The theories I find believable talk about vibrations that can resonate with certain "strings" below the earth, causing those vibrations to cascade and displace, in the process causing an earthquake that is far more powerful than the vibrations used.
I find that theory quite believable.
For correct question is "is it possible to have a technology that could be used to trigger earthquakes, are certain areas under certain conditions ?"
It maybe HAARP, it may be vibrations, it make be shaped charges inside the earth, or anything else.
The answer to that would be "I cannot imagine why such a technology is not possible"
For the record, I even predicted a false flag in Turkey just 9 days before.
If the implication is that this earthquake is a coincidence, I am not buying it.
You do a minor flick with your finger at the bottom, and the whole tower collapses releasing orders of magnitude more energy than you put in.
Yes, but, wait—the laws of conservation of energy state that the energy needed to destroy a tower was first spent in its construction. For the entire life of the building, it stores its own destructive energy from the moment of its construction. The act of deconstructing a critical support is only the act of releasing the kinetic energy that was invested, say, 40 years earlier.
The theories I find believable talk about vibrations that can resonate with certain "strings" below the earth, causing those vibrations to cascade and displace, in the process causing an earthquake that is far more powerful than the vibrations used.
Yes! I want to see more lab work demonstrated on this.
It maybe HAARP, it may be vibrations, it make be shaped charges inside the earth, or anything else.
Whatever it is, from a legal standpoint, using this technology on another country is an act of war, plain and simple, and, if this technology spreads and propagates, it will be used by other countries against us. But, that's not happened because, frankly, no one yet can satisfy what I'm saying about the energy budget, here.
For the record, I even predicted a false flag in Turkey just 9 days before.
You didn't call an earthquake, tho. Not trying to split hairs unfairly on you, tho, but, that's a bit long of a stretch as far as predictions go. If the implication is that this earthquake is a coincidence, you must explain it to a higher level of resolution than merely predicting "something" happening as a "false flag." There are more steps, here, and they need to be explained, at least to a level where the "jump" from one assumption to the next makes plausible scientific sense. At the moment, it does not.
The main point I like to make is that to generate an earthquake that released as much energy as a Tsar Bomb, you dont have to input energy equivalent to this.
Think about a very tall jenga tower. You do a minor flick with your finger at the bottom, and the whole tower collapses releasing orders of magnitude more energy than you put in.
The theories I find believable talk about vibrations that can resonate with certain "strings" below the earth, causing those vibrations to cascade and displace, in the process causing an earthquake that is far more powerful than the vibrations used.
I find that theory quite believable.
For correct question is "is it possible to have a technology that could be used to trigger earthquakes, are certain areas under certain conditions ?"
It maybe HAARP, it may be vibrations, it make be shaped charges inside the earth, or anything else.
The answer to that would be "I cannot imagine why such a technology is not possible"
For the record, I even predicted a false flag in Turkey just 9 days before.
If the implication is that this earthquake is a coincidence, I am not buying it.
Yes, but, wait—the laws of conservation of energy state that the energy needed to destroy a tower was first spent in its construction. For the entire life of the building, it stores its own destructive energy from the moment of its construction. The act of deconstructing a critical support is only the act of releasing the kinetic energy that was invested, say, 40 years earlier.
Yes! I want to see more lab work demonstrated on this.
Whatever it is, from a legal standpoint, using this technology on another country is an act of war, plain and simple, and, if this technology spreads and propagates, it will be used by other countries against us. But, that's not happened because, frankly, no one yet can satisfy what I'm saying about the energy budget, here.
You didn't call an earthquake, tho. Not trying to split hairs unfairly on you, tho, but, that's a bit long of a stretch as far as predictions go. If the implication is that this earthquake is a coincidence, you must explain it to a higher level of resolution than merely predicting "something" happening as a "false flag." There are more steps, here, and they need to be explained, at least to a level where the "jump" from one assumption to the next makes plausible scientific sense. At the moment, it does not.
https://yewtu.be/channel/UCDlTlFdpcElvHsjH-b6ieBA
https://yewtu.be/channel/UCsELkVA5QDltjjIHyL7mWYQ
https://yewtu.be/channel/UCvHqXK_Hz79tjqRosK4tWYA
Tip of the iceberg...