>Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 06:28:30 -0800 (PST)
>From: Michael Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: Electronics and cancer
>To: Allan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>Allan,
>
>Please Fwd:
>
>Tom,
>
>This is one thing that I have absolutely no
>comprehension on.
>
>I understand that HAARP has been related to a form of
>Tesla Technology. However, Tesla fought Hertz tooth
>and nail over the wave theory. Tesla believed that
>the wave idea was totally a product of university
>system thinking and had nothing to do with the nature
>of the physics.(Remember it was with the insistance of
>that same system that Professors declared that
>Alternating Current was an impossibility!) Only when
>Tesla presented an item hard for students to
>understand would he bring an analogy relative to water
>to mind. But this was only for the purposes of
>presenting the concept.
>
>Now what do we do when the analogy becomes the reason
>and the idea?
>
>Yeech! Tesla also stressed that the actual working of
>the nature of these devices he built was not so much
>based upon the the nature of the materials themselves,
>but that the flow was based totally upon the
>proportion and arrangement of their spacial natures.
>
>What happens when the analogy becomes the concrete
>idea that a technology is built on rather that the
>understanding that it is an allusion designed to teach
>novices the behaviour of things that can't be seen
>with the naked eye? Then as well as not having full
>comprehension of the immaterial, we become exposed to
>the reflux of the very things we cannot see and are
>experimenting around in the dark. In other words we
>then have no measuring tool and cannot measure these
>other reactions.
>
>My argument is not necessarily with what you say here
>Tom, but with a decending left hand vortex of people
>who are experimenting with things they have no
>knowledge of but go ahead because the get what they
>want.
>
>Tesla spent a large degree of his energy attempting to
>clearly demonstrate both physically and mathmatically
>the actual phenomena behind the reactions - to clear
>up the mathmatical hack jobs that the modern
>university created while sitting in their ivory towers
>of babel based totally on mathmatical mechanics.
>
>By having some of Tesla's ideas while dis-requarding
>the warnings of the person who showed that these
>phenomena were possible is an act of suicide. It
>would have clearly been better if he would have told
>them nothing and created his own following leaving the
>authorities in the dark. However, now they have half
>and choose not to employ the disipline that went with
>it.
>
>Michael.
>
><Markess, this leads us right back to weather control.
>T. Bearden claims the KGB has been using scalar beams
>to mess with the weather since the 1950s. They were
>way ahead of us in HAARP type technology using Long
>Waves, and according to Bearden they have created some
>destructive weather phenomena in the west as part of
>their testing programs.
>
>I'd like to know a bit about W. Reich's experiments
>from some of the experts out there. Are waves involved
>in Reich's weather work with orgone or is this
>something altogether different? If there are waves
>involved what frequencies are we talking about? Are
>etheric forces waveless and without particles since
>they are really not material forces? I need a little
>basic education here.
>- Thanks, Tom>
>
>
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! Sports - sign up for Fantasy Baseball
>http://sports.yahoo.com
