1

I read about these in a few places,

This article states:

Powers of Longitudinal Wave Interferometers

1 - influence and control the weather,

2 - deviate the giant jetstreams of the upper atmosphere,

cited by Tom Bearden at Cheniere.Org

This article states:

The talk was given in the mid-1980s and since then, the technology has been developed into more rigorous longitudinal EM wave interferometry, which is the exact nature of those earlier weather engineering weapons.

So, do these weapons actually exist? (or are they just theoretical)

And have they ever been used?

Community
  • 1
Jimmery
  • 1,005
  • 2
  • 10
  • 13
  • 12
    First link is to a page with "Time Cube" levels of crazy and the second link is to a chemtrail site. Can you come up with any better sources than that? – DenisS Jan 25 '18 at 21:47
  • 4
    Googling "Longitudinal Wave Interferometry" brings up a LOT of rubbish sites, but nothing even remotely sane/reputable. A lot of them seem to be referencing this Tom Bearden fellow, who is also involved with free energy/perpetual motion device shenanigans. – Jack Of All Trades 234 Jan 25 '18 at 22:00
  • 3
    Are they _even_ theoretical, or are they just complete myths? – JMac Jan 25 '18 at 22:19
  • 3
    Can you provide any coherent definition of "longitudinal wave interferometry"?? – Daniel R Hicks Jan 25 '18 at 23:05
  • 8
    I'll just observe that a "-meter" is something used to produce some sort of measurement. It is not something used to cause alterations. – Daniel R Hicks Jan 25 '18 at 23:07
  • 1
    A search of "Longitudinal Wave Interferometry" on Web of Science, which indexes decades' worth of scientific journals, brings up no results using that as a title or topic. – jeffronicus Jan 25 '18 at 23:11
  • 10
    This claim's confusing. ["_Interferometry_"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interferometry) is, by definition, an observational technique. Even if an interferometer were repurposed to perform some other task, e.g. control the weather, it'd no longer be "_interferometry_". – Nat Jan 26 '18 at 02:19
  • 1
    While not being about these specific claims https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/7971/has-weather-been-weaponised?noredirect=1&lq=1 says some reasonably similar things exist. –  Jan 26 '18 at 07:04
  • 4
    @DenisStallings: The notability references in questions are allowed to be fringe - that's rather the point of the site. The real issue is (a) whether they are notable, and this seems rather borderline to me, and (b) whether they can be used to work out what the claim actually is. Anyone read/listened long enough to be able to extract that? – Oddthinking Jan 26 '18 at 10:57
  • 2
    if anyone can summarize these comments to say something along the lines of "this is most likely pseudoscience rubbish" i would accept that as an answer – Jimmery Jan 26 '18 at 10:59
  • 3
    @Jimmery The "woodpecker transmitters" that the page is talking about is the soviet [Duga over-the-horizon radar](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duga_radar). There is nothing magical about them, they are just large radars. Look through the rest of the page, and the **amazing** claims that are being made. If that page is to be believed, those radars are so capable that not even a fictional cartoon supervillan would trust that sales pitch. "Claims without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". That page has not even ordinary evidence. –  Jan 26 '18 at 13:01
  • 2
    @Jimmery All you have to do to answer anyone leaning on that page as "evidence" is to say "Sorry, I do not trust bad science fiction". If they say "But it is not science fiction!" just reply "Prove it...". –  Jan 26 '18 at 13:04
  • 2
    @Oddthinking you put it much more eloquently than me but that was kind of what I was trying to get at. Maybe I was too quick to judge the Chemtrails site for lacking notability since they're probably all on board with this theory, but link 1 is just piles of crazy once you start exploring – DenisS Jan 26 '18 at 16:28
  • 8
    Also, "Maybe I was too quick to judge the Chemtrails site for lacking notability" is a sentence I never thought I would type in my life. – DenisS Jan 26 '18 at 16:29
  • @DenisStallings - Actually, here are some pictures of Soviet planes generating chemtrails: https://aviation.stackexchange.com/a/47997 – Daniel R Hicks Jan 26 '18 at 22:49
  • "Telemetry" is used to send remote signals to a device, causing alterations. – WakeDemons3 Feb 01 '18 at 16:40

1 Answers1

9

I don't believe "longitudinal wave interferometry" is actually a thing. Therefore, I think it's safe to say that any related weapons do not actually exist, and even implying that said weapons are "just theoretical" would be giving the whole notion too much legitimacy.

Google Scholar returns only one result for "longitudinal wave interferometry", which is a paper by Bearden and others describing an inherently-fictional free energy device.

Regarding the second quote in your question, EM waves are transverse waves, so the mention of longitudinal EM wave interferometry doesn't even seem meaningful.

Lastly, interferometry is an observation and measurement technique, as many have pointed out in the comments. To say that interferometry has been used as any kind of weapon is absurd.

Laurel
  • 30,040
  • 9
  • 132
  • 118
Tashus
  • 318
  • 3
  • 9
  • So basically they even got every word wrong in the name of their fictional device. Classic. – JMac Feb 02 '18 at 19:21