May 30, 2014 • 32 mins
It sounds like the plot of a James Bond film: Some shadowy supervillain holds the world for ransom while threatening to destroy civilization with an earthquake, floods or volcanic eruptions. But some believe that humanity has more control over Earth's than ever before. Why? Could someone really create a natural disaster -- and use it as a weapon? Learn more with Ben and Matt.
Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
From UFOs two, ghosts and government cover ups. History is
riddled with unexplained events. You can turn back now or
learn the stuff they don't want you to now. Readings listeners.
My name is Max and I'm Ben, and this is
stuff they don't want you to know. Nice. Nice. I
(00:24):
like how it's a little bit different every time with
the music as well. Uh, then it's it's different every time,
and it's never a disaster. I saw something that I
think is going to be a disaster recently on television
met Yes, well now it America's got talent. Uh it
(00:45):
was close. It was you know, I don't have cable, right,
I do have Netflix, and uh I'll sometimes watch things
online on Hulu. So I was watching this thing on Hulu,
and Hulu has a bunch of commercial right, sure, commercials
for days. We had this one commercial that freaked me
out a little man. It was. It was a McDonald's commercial.
(01:08):
And this McDonald's commercial, they say, oh you love coca cola, Well,
guess what, all coca cola is going to be one dollar,
whether it's a small, a medium, or a large, just
one dollar. Now I think of that more as a
a perhaps a health disaster for some people, because why
(01:29):
would you pay a dollar for the small one? Yeah?
Is it? Uh is? Does the same thing go with
the water? I don't know. God, I guess no one
really orders super sized water. I do if i'm if
I've got rehearsal for band, I go when I get
the largest bottle of water I can possibly get, and
then I use it for the next couple of weeks
until I feel the plastic has been used enough starts
(01:52):
to taste of plastic. Um. Well, the disasters aside, and
do let us know what you think about this weird
Coca cola manns um those sorts of disasters side rather,
you and I are here to ask a question that
we have talked about in our video series UH for years,
literally in many different ways. Right, Yes, can humans, in
(02:14):
some way, shape or form create natural disasters, or at
least disasters that would normally be naturally occurring. Okay, so
natural disasters? Then what what kind of stuff would that be?
What would be a natural disaster? You're looking at everything
from hurricanes to earthquakes. Those are the two probably main occurrences.
(02:38):
There are also tornadoes, tsunamis right, It's just anything you
can think of that would be a natural disaster. Is
there a way that a human could harness the power
to make one of those volcanic eruption right? Yes, we
see that in science fiction or thriller films sometimes where
there's some supervillain who is setting out to, you know,
(02:59):
make all all of the world's volcanoes erupted once or something.
That's also where they keep their layers. So I'm a
little confused about why they would want the things that
are right next to their layer to explode. I don't
have to find a good caldera or really the moon
base is the way to go. But we're differentiating here
between things that would be manmade disasters. Manmade disasters would
(03:23):
be things like a financial crash, you know, like the
Great Depression um A, in many ways a manmade disaster. Now,
of course, I know a lot of people can write
in and say the drought created the dust bowl. Um
Also financial handling by people in urban sitting in urban
(03:47):
environments and financial centers of the time. Uh, their their
behavior didn't help. I think it accelerated it. So we
we do know that human beings have have it well
within our collective grasp to make disasters for ourselves. Um, well, sure, war.
War creates a type of disaster. Yeah, war, that's that's
(04:09):
a great example. That's one of the best examples. UM.
Diseases that spread via humans that could be a disaster.
Uh there there there are numerous things. UM. Pollution sites
can be disastrous. Um. History class our our buddies over it.
Stuff you miss and History class have a couple of
(04:29):
great podcasts about very strange disasters that occurred, uh, such
as molasses flood or a flood of I think it
was gin somewhere in London. It sounds familiar, man, I
need to catch up on that show. Human beings, let's
just put out human beings have a propensity for making
(04:51):
trouble and getting into hijinks. But aside from these things,
the question is if humans could create natural disasters and I,
like they said, in some way, then how would these
things be created? Like? How? How? What? What's something that
people bring up when they talk about this and the
(05:13):
tools that could be possibly used to make these things? Well,
one of the most popular ones is the high frequency
Active Auroral Research Program or HARP. You've seen it before,
You've seen it on YouTube all over the place. We've
covered it many times. We just did another video on it.
It's this research station in Alaska and Cocona, Alaska. I
(05:33):
believe well that this is one of the main HARP stations.
There are numerous stations that throughout the world that have
the same research Crown Jewel that the Air Force zones. Yes,
and I believe it was the original UH station, the
HARP station. I'm not sure if that's correct that we
(05:54):
know about. Yes, And it is unclassified right yet, and
it's run by the Air Force, I believe, I can't remember.
I think the Navy had a hand in it at
one point in partnership with a couple of other organizations.
And currently it may be sold to the University of
Alaska if they're willing to come up with the scratch
(06:17):
something like five million dollars just to run the thing
for a year, and that's just to make it work,
and they're what the What HART does is it shoots
radio beams into the ionosphere, which is a way out
of the way place in the atmosphere that a lot
of human beings really don't have any call to ever
(06:38):
reach unless we're going through it on the way to space. Yeah,
and when you when you think about the ionosphere and
correct me if I'm wrong here, Ben, when you see
if you've ever seen the northern or southern lights, that's
the that's the that's activity that's occurring inside the ionosphere
when these charged particles are being active, aided essentially by
(07:01):
the sun. Right and HARP managed to the HARP and Gatona,
Alaska managed to create the first recorded artificial aurora borealis,
which was which was really neat. I do have to say, though,
there's a little bone of contention I have with some
of our YouTube listeners said, you know, they're HARP stations everywhere.
(07:22):
That's not correct. There are, I honest, spheric research stations everywhere.
They are not HARP. That's like saying you know that.
That's kind of like saying there's a Toyota Corolla in Gacona, Alaska,
and there are cars in other places, So there are
Toyota Corollas across the world. Okay, I see what you're saying.
(07:45):
At one point before we continue here, now, HARP itself
closed down, but it's not unusual for it to close down.
We have a lot of this stuff in our video
on HARP. Our latest video. One of my favorite titles uh,
what what the hell is going on at HARP or
what the hell are they doing at HARP or something
like that, something to that effect. And in there we
(08:07):
talk about the HARP station. There are other ion spheric
research facilities in the world across the world, but they
are not the HARP that we're harping on. I know,
I know, well they're okay, So this is the I
(08:27):
don't know what else I can say about this UM.
It's just it's fascinating to think it kind of harkens
back to the ideas of Tesla at least that's what
what that's what rings in my head when I think
about HARP and testing the ionosphere and what can you
do with it, although it has nothing to do with well,
at least to my knowledge, has nothing to do with
(08:49):
somehow connecting electrically to the ionosphere the way Tesla wanted to. Man,
we're gonna have to republish that Tesla video soon, aren't we. Yeah, yeah,
I'd like to do a whole new video on Tesla
UM because there's a lot of interest in it. And
you know, that was one of the situations where we
found there really was perhaps some stuff they don't want
(09:10):
you to know. And before we move on from the
subject of heart well, we we should point out that Matt,
as you said, it's not it's not a top secret
facility like Groom Lake, you know, or like the UM
whatever is happening on Diego Garcia, Right. This is this
(09:30):
is a place where while it was open, scientists would
be glad to give you knowledge. I'm sure there were
some things that were classified, but they would they would
be glad to give you a look at what they
were doing, talk to you about it if they had time. Uh.
You I don't know if you could just go up
there and get a tour. But it had a chain
leak fence around it. It's not a high value target
(09:53):
for a lot of people. The research that they were doing,
if we understand it correctly, is to see how changes
in the ionosphere can affect communication. That's one of the
big things. So this is big because it goes into
stuff like how uh an I CBM and inter intercontinental
(10:13):
ballistic missile would be able to guide itself or stay
guided right, uh, how radio communications could be altered or
even satellite and for it to affect the weather. What
what we were finding is that it would have to
be just from the kind of equipment to have, it
(10:34):
would have to be on a much more massive scale. Yes,
And it seems like it seems like at least the
Heart facility there in Gakona was not large enough to really,
uh you know, really shape the foundations of the Earth
and change the weather. But we have other ways of
changing the weather, and they're very old. They go back
(10:55):
to like World War One and stuff. Right, So what's
the what's the theoretical side? If if everything we do
know about Heart that's publicly available is smoke and mirrors,
smoke on the water right table at the oldies song,
then what what are the theories about Heart? So there
are several. One of the main ones that you hear
(11:16):
a lot is that it can somehow shoot an energy beam,
a radio energy beam into the ionosphere and then somehow
change the direction or by angling that beam in a
certain way two have it kind of arc around the
Earth and then come back down in a certain spot,
and then in that spot the ion sphere because it
(11:37):
has a connection with plate Earth movements, with tectonic movements,
um well, at least the tectonic movements seem to affect
the ionosphere, which does not necessarily mean the iono sphere
affects the tectonic movements. However, in this theory, because of
they've kind of aimed the iono sphere and changed it
(11:58):
a little bit and sent it downwards into the Earth,
it would create an earthquake in that position, right, And
we know that, as we said in our in our
videos that our our buddies moch Mood odd Menajade and
Ugo Chavez did say that bit sarcastically. Both um both
(12:19):
in two thousand and ten alleged that Harp directly was
involved with UH what was involved with creating natural disasters?
I think Amnijad, as we say in our video, UH
blamed the Pakistan floods on it, and Chavez blamed the
Haitian earthquake and um, well, and you made a great
(12:42):
point then that that one facility perhaps doesn't have the
power to do something to that effect. Is it possible
that there's a massive facility somewhere else, or what if
a lot of these ionospheric testing facilities are working together?
Ben Like, honestly, what if what if there are several
ionospheric testing facilities, say they're a couple in Europe somewhere.
(13:05):
There are a couple in Asia, couple in the US.
They all work together. Whoa man not bad? Not bad?
Idea a networked disaster club, right, highly improbable, but it
would be fascinating possible. I don't know you and I
haven't been everywhere. We'd have to go check it all
out first. One thing that we do know that sounds
(13:28):
crazy but is completely true, and we've covered this before
as well, is whether modification and this can relate to
natural disasters. But walk with us here for a second,
so you can shoot It turns out you can shoot
silver I had died into the sky. And although there
are varying degrees of success, there's a lot of healthy
(13:50):
skepticism about this. Uh. It seems that it has the
potential to create rain clouds. Well yes, but you you
certainly need the moisture in the air already in order
to make it happen. And it's something like forty I
think this success rate was less yeah, yeah, less more
(14:12):
than five. Uh, they've been they, being human beings history,
have tried to work with this existing technology and find
different ways to modify the weather. However, we know that
when experiments began with it in the United Kingdom. Uh,
there were reports that have triggered flooding. We know that
the largest weather modification network in the world, at least
(14:36):
the one that the public knows about, is in China.
And Uh there are people who have part time jobs
where they just shoot uh silver I died into the
clouds and hope that this could, hope that this could somehow,
you know, uh, provide favorable rain conditions for their local area. However,
(14:57):
we know that when when water gathers in one place,
it comes from somewhere right, So it's completely possible now
whether modification passed a certain threshold will create a situation
in which we will see, uh an increase in things
like droughts, or maybe an increase in frequency of flooding
(15:20):
or things like that. Because we're messing with the system,
we don't understand. I know how b movie that sounds,
but it's true, which brings us to the other point.
Climate change, man, climate change, climate change, global warming. It
used to be called and somebody won the buzzword war.
Somebody bernased it into a climate change instead of global warming. Yeah,
(15:43):
because it was so cold less I use bernais as
a verb. Now, Yeah, I don't think it sounds it
sounds like a sauce. So this is a massive topic.
This is a topic that I'm sure you, whoever you
are listening of this, you have some very strong opinions
about climate change. And it's tough for us because you know,
(16:09):
Ben and I want to learn the truth as or
at least as close to the truth as we can
possibly learn. That's what this show is about, and we
want to be able to tell it to you. The
problem is when you've got these extremely strong opinions, no
matter what you and I say, or what even the
science says, some people's minds will never be changed. Well,
(16:29):
let's present the gist. Okay, here's the gist. Uh. We've
got one side which says that there's one side that
says that human intervention is making a measurable impact in
the world. Of the primary arguments for a lot of
climate change stuff concern the effects of the human population
on the atmosphere. Right, so c O two emissions, Uh
(16:54):
get caught up in this. But you'll also hear stuff
about damage to the ozone layer, um, the amount of
pollution minted by factories and by motor vehicles, factory farming. Right,
I was gonna say, and and livestock, which are uh.
On our show, one of our other show's car stuff,
we have a great episode about whether whether cows or
(17:16):
cars are more responsible for pollution. Yeah, it's a really
weird thing to walk through, but I recommend if someone's
interest in that. So what what we have found is, UM.
We have found is that for a long time, the
people tied up in the research on this at invested
(17:40):
interest in some cases an agenda. There are cases where
evidence that didn't fit an official narrative was repressed. Um.
And in most of the cases that I've heard, this
was evidence where scientists would say, well, uh, we have
found this rise in temperature over this time. It correlates
to factors X, Y, and z. They're for we think
(18:01):
that human beings are having an effect. And then the
people who were funding the study you didn't want to
hear that, so they said, Okay, you know, go do
the math again. Yeah, just go do the math again
and if you want to keep your job. But then
on the other side, we have people who say that
there is a concentrated active conspiracy to propagate this idea
(18:26):
of enormous cataclysmic environmental change and that this, uh, this
is happening because there is um this is happening because
it's a way to scare people into giving up their
means of production, which would make it easier. A lot
of these ideas are tied up into the concept of
a one world government, new World order sort of thing.
(18:50):
The question then becomes one of scale. So the argument
here against climate change is often, you know, human beings
cannot do enough. We're not big enough really to affect
the great machine that is the world. Um you know,
just like harp is not big enough really to affect
(19:12):
the great machine that is the ionosphere. And and it's
strange because there can be there can be some contradictory
reasoning there. There can be people who don't believe that
climate change is real, but do believe that HARP controls
the weather, and so it's an interesting cognitive distance. But
one thing we do know is that when we talk
about scale, we're not just talking about amount to people
(19:35):
versus size of the world. We're talking about time of people.
So agriculture can cause climate change as well, because we're
changing the types of plants, are changing, type of livestock
that interact in a biome. So it's not necessarily a
worldwide climate change, right. Human beings can be possibly responsible
(19:57):
for things like desertification, where the desert just starts eating places, right,
and erosion. Human beings can clearly be responsible for erosion.
Climate change is not just a matter of calculating pollution, right. Um,
So there's the other part, and I know I'm going
on rant here, Matt, there's another part the here that
(20:19):
comes in with this, um, speaking of scale, the world's
climate system is extraordinarily complex. We don't really know what's
going on with it. Meteorologists are scarily accurate. Um within
you know, the short term before or after stuff, but
the further out you go, there just so many variables
(20:40):
that we don't really understand the system in which we're participating.
And whenever there is a huge chance for unintended consequences,
it usually means that there's not a clear cut, clean answer.
But human beings on the whole have already been changing
the you know, the quote unquote climate. The way in
(21:03):
which it's focused now, the way in which the debate
is framed, is designed to fool the average member of
the public into just dwelling on one aspect of how
human beings influenced the world, and um, could that create disasters?
Maybe I would just have to say, Ben, after listening
(21:25):
to Bill nye on talking on multiple things and people
like Nil deGrasse Tyson and other other people in the
field of science, that I respect their opinions, I would say,
because I am not a climatologist and not scientists. I
didn't go to school for any of that, um, so
it's difficult for me to really give an opinion that
(21:48):
in any way matters in any shape or form um. However,
I would say that from what I've learned from them,
the prevailing science says that that humans are affecting the
overall biome and the climate on the Earth. And the
conspiracy side would most definitely be that there are interests
(22:08):
in the energy field that would rather maintain the status
quo of you know, burning fossil fuels in our vehicles
and you know, having coal factories, clean coal factories, large farms. Yeah,
I think I think that would be the conspiracy side
in I also I also think that at this point
(22:32):
I haven't seen any compelling evidence of a attempts to
fake global warming, your climate change. I have seen compelling
evidence of attempts to suppress that that sort of ongoing research. Um.
And speaking of the interaction between business and science, Uh,
(22:55):
there's another thing that we did that we found out
was a truth is Stranger than action situation, right, Yes,
the and in our attempts to extract as much oil
as possible from the earth and natural gas and natural gas,
we've decided to come up with this thing called fracking.
(23:16):
And that's at least what we call it hydraulic fracturing.
And it's essentially it's a fairly simple well, it's not
a simple process. Obviously, it costs a lot of money.
It's complicated, but the idea is simple. You send down
a drill into the earth, into rocks, and then you
(23:36):
you force this highly pressurized liquid which is hydraulic liquid
and chemicals, waters and a couple of chemicals some I
think methylenes or something ease yes, and you force the
rocks to break open. You frack those rocks right open,
(23:57):
and that releases some of the natural gas that's trapped
in there, and the oil and the oil and all
the great things that you can burn for profit. So
there's an ongoing debate, you know this, Uh, this does
pose a risk to groundwater because it is forcing things
that are dangerous for human consumption into the ground and
(24:18):
through the water table deep into the ground. And UM,
the argument is there are safe way there, there are
safe ways to do it. How do you do it?
There are these wells wherein the used liquid is stored. Uh.
There are also some fairly compelling studies that surprise breaking
the breaking the rocks, under the under the mountains, under
(24:42):
the towns, under the cities, and the fields. UH that
this can make the ground unstables. Who who to thunk?
And it can make well? It can. The problem is
that UM, we can only estimate how much how much
the effect it would be in a lot of ways.
So it is possible that fracking can induce earthquakes, which
(25:05):
makes it a man made natural disaster. UM not the
same way that harp or UH. Going back to the
network of ionospheric UH, which is diabolical. I love it,
um if if it's not that same level, but it is.
It is possible, and in some cases people have already
(25:26):
started tracing fracking to earthquake events. I think specifically in
two thousand eight two thousand nine. Have a question though
about what what we have on Our outline is the
elephant in the room, Matt, which is human population and
global development. Are more natural disasters occurring or natural disasters
(25:51):
becoming more dangerous, more expensive? Or is it just that
there are more people in more places? Can Can I
just go with all of the above? Yeah, because well
sure there if you look at the Haiti earthquake, the
recent Haiti earthquake, there's so many people living just a
(26:11):
ton of people living in structures that are dangerous when
there's an earthquake, um, and that's how a lot of
people get hurt. Maybe if you live in a place
that is not prepared from a technology or an infrastructure
standpoint for this kind of natural disaster. If a hurricane
(26:31):
rolls through or a giant tornado rolls through in the
buildings in which a large group of people are living
in are not prepared for that, then that's how you
get disasters. That's how you get deaths, at least lots
of deaths. So it's yeah, that's I think that's a
very good point. We have more and more people, and
they're increasingly moving, so formerly inhospitable environments or environments that
(26:56):
are trans transitioning to an inhospitable state now because of
all the other people who were there. Uh, A lot
of the air in India and China is filthy on
a lot of the contamination problems that we sort of
kicked the can down the road on for a few
(27:16):
for a few decades, right are coming back to bite
us because people are moving into those areas. And what
what we're finding then is uh, what we're finding are
are some weird, ugly truth. One one of the questions
that I was thinking about asking you is if you
(27:39):
looked at it objectively, we're listeners that if all of
us were aliens, right, and everybody who listened to the
show arrived on a spaceship to check out Earth, would
we think that humans were the natural disaster? Well, we'd
probably think of them as a answer of some sort.
(28:01):
Joe Rogan has a great speech. Yeah when you he's
flying over l A and just looking right before he
got to l A, he's looking at California and the
beautiful just the way, man, this is an amazing looking planet.
And then all of a sudden, yeah, the protruding gray,
just nastiness and smoke. So yeah, Ben, I you know,
(28:24):
I think about even the matrix lines about humans being
a virus, and that stuff really resonates with me because
I I don't know. I feel I want to feel
more connected to the planet a lot of times, and
most of the time I don't. And I wonder if
that's just something ingreened or something that we have done
(28:47):
to ourselves, that we've programmed ourselves to feel separate. Hmm.
That's a good question, and that's sort of a in
some ways that sounds like a cultural or psychological disaster.
I think that what we're going to see over time
is is that if the technology does exist to create
(29:10):
natural disasters, to to create you know, gigantic earthquakes, mudslides
and so on. Um. Oh. Another side fact, North Korea
was mentioned as one of the places that was victimized
by natural disaster when they had I think a series
of floods a few years ago. But if that technology
um did exist, it would be something that world governments
(29:31):
and non government agencies or organizations tried to at least
have access to. We mentioned to quote several times once
and what the hell is fracking? And once in our
video on earthquakes, uh that Secretary Defense William Cohen talking
about the possibilities of future war, including stuff like tailored viruses, right,
(29:56):
tailored bugs to take out a certain population, right, scared
stuff and increasingly I won't say probable yet, but increasingly possible.
And then we've got the other one of the other
things he mentioned, And he's not the only one to
mentioned this. Uh. Foreign ministers in Russia mentioned this kind
of stuff too, the concept of eco terrorism destroying you know,
(30:19):
which is a which is an idea that goes way
back to siege days, you know, when you could destroy
your opponents access to food or clean water, right, or
just throw plague bodies into the well. That kind of stuff, Um, diabolical. Yeah,
but now on a worldwide scale. At this point we
(30:40):
should probably go. It looks like our buddies from a
stuff Mom never told you, or people are come by
the studio window and giving us the eye. Josh came
by a second ago, So we better get out of here. Uh, guys,
I hope you enjoyed this episode. We didn't have a
sponsor for this. For some reason, Illumination Global unlim It
had decided not to sponsor our episode. Um, I don't know,
(31:04):
maybe it is this is conflicting interests there's conflicting interests.
Just for this episode. They'll be back though. Yeah. Weirdly enough,
we just got a weather report that says a big
storm is moving name what oh oh man, you hear that? Yeah,
we're better, well, Matt. Where can people find us? Hopefully? Well?
You can find us on Facebook and Twitter. We're at
conspiracy Stuff. You can find us at our website. Our
(31:28):
brand spanking new, it's not brand spaking new. It's to
be fair, it's it's a little old now brands making
new stuff on it. That's right. Stuff. They don't want
you to know. Dot Com the longest year r L.
But you will be so satisfied once you've entered it.
It's about the journey, that's right. Also, if you want
to skip all that social media stuff and just contact
us directly, we have a new email address. You can
(31:50):
contact us at conspiracy at how stuff works dot com.
From more on this topic, another unexplained phenomenon, visit test
tube dot com slash conspiracy stuff. You can also get
in touch on Twitter at the handle at conspiracy Stuff.
(32:32):
M
From UFOs two, ghosts and government cover ups. History is
riddled with unexplained events. You can turn back now or
learn the stuff they don't want you to now. Readings listeners.
My name is Max and I'm Ben, and this is
stuff they don't want you to know. Nice. Nice. I
(00:24):
like how it's a little bit different every time with
the music as well. Uh, then it's it's different every time,
and it's never a disaster. I saw something that I
think is going to be a disaster recently on television
met Yes, well now it America's got talent. Uh it
(00:45):
was close. It was you know, I don't have cable, right,
I do have Netflix, and uh I'll sometimes watch things
online on Hulu. So I was watching this thing on Hulu,
and Hulu has a bunch of commercial right, sure, commercials
for days. We had this one commercial that freaked me
out a little man. It was. It was a McDonald's commercial.
(01:08):
And this McDonald's commercial, they say, oh you love coca cola, Well,
guess what, all coca cola is going to be one dollar,
whether it's a small, a medium, or a large, just
one dollar. Now I think of that more as a
a perhaps a health disaster for some people, because why
(01:29):
would you pay a dollar for the small one? Yeah?
Is it? Uh is? Does the same thing go with
the water? I don't know. God, I guess no one
really orders super sized water. I do if i'm if
I've got rehearsal for band, I go when I get
the largest bottle of water I can possibly get, and
then I use it for the next couple of weeks
until I feel the plastic has been used enough starts
(01:52):
to taste of plastic. Um. Well, the disasters aside, and
do let us know what you think about this weird
Coca cola manns um those sorts of disasters side rather,
you and I are here to ask a question that
we have talked about in our video series UH for years,
literally in many different ways. Right, Yes, can humans, in
(02:14):
some way, shape or form create natural disasters, or at
least disasters that would normally be naturally occurring. Okay, so
natural disasters? Then what what kind of stuff would that be?
What would be a natural disaster? You're looking at everything
from hurricanes to earthquakes. Those are the two probably main occurrences.
(02:38):
There are also tornadoes, tsunamis right, It's just anything you
can think of that would be a natural disaster. Is
there a way that a human could harness the power
to make one of those volcanic eruption right? Yes, we
see that in science fiction or thriller films sometimes where
there's some supervillain who is setting out to, you know,
(02:59):
make all all of the world's volcanoes erupted once or something.
That's also where they keep their layers. So I'm a
little confused about why they would want the things that
are right next to their layer to explode. I don't
have to find a good caldera or really the moon
base is the way to go. But we're differentiating here
between things that would be manmade disasters. Manmade disasters would
(03:23):
be things like a financial crash, you know, like the
Great Depression um A, in many ways a manmade disaster. Now,
of course, I know a lot of people can write
in and say the drought created the dust bowl. Um
Also financial handling by people in urban sitting in urban
(03:47):
environments and financial centers of the time. Uh, their their
behavior didn't help. I think it accelerated it. So we
we do know that human beings have have it well
within our collective grasp to make disasters for ourselves. Um, well, sure, war.
War creates a type of disaster. Yeah, war, that's that's
(04:09):
a great example. That's one of the best examples. UM.
Diseases that spread via humans that could be a disaster.
Uh there there there are numerous things. UM. Pollution sites
can be disastrous. Um. History class our our buddies over it.
Stuff you miss and History class have a couple of
(04:29):
great podcasts about very strange disasters that occurred, uh, such
as molasses flood or a flood of I think it
was gin somewhere in London. It sounds familiar, man, I
need to catch up on that show. Human beings, let's
just put out human beings have a propensity for making
(04:51):
trouble and getting into hijinks. But aside from these things,
the question is if humans could create natural disasters and I,
like they said, in some way, then how would these
things be created? Like? How? How? What? What's something that
people bring up when they talk about this and the
(05:13):
tools that could be possibly used to make these things? Well,
one of the most popular ones is the high frequency
Active Auroral Research Program or HARP. You've seen it before,
You've seen it on YouTube all over the place. We've
covered it many times. We just did another video on it.
It's this research station in Alaska and Cocona, Alaska. I
(05:33):
believe well that this is one of the main HARP stations.
There are numerous stations that throughout the world that have
the same research Crown Jewel that the Air Force zones. Yes,
and I believe it was the original UH station, the
HARP station. I'm not sure if that's correct that we
(05:54):
know about. Yes, And it is unclassified right yet, and
it's run by the Air Force, I believe, I can't remember.
I think the Navy had a hand in it at
one point in partnership with a couple of other organizations.
And currently it may be sold to the University of
Alaska if they're willing to come up with the scratch
(06:17):
something like five million dollars just to run the thing
for a year, and that's just to make it work,
and they're what the What HART does is it shoots
radio beams into the ionosphere, which is a way out
of the way place in the atmosphere that a lot
of human beings really don't have any call to ever
(06:38):
reach unless we're going through it on the way to space. Yeah,
and when you when you think about the ionosphere and
correct me if I'm wrong here, Ben, when you see
if you've ever seen the northern or southern lights, that's
the that's the that's activity that's occurring inside the ionosphere
when these charged particles are being active, aided essentially by
(07:01):
the sun. Right and HARP managed to the HARP and Gatona,
Alaska managed to create the first recorded artificial aurora borealis,
which was which was really neat. I do have to say, though,
there's a little bone of contention I have with some
of our YouTube listeners said, you know, they're HARP stations everywhere.
(07:22):
That's not correct. There are, I honest, spheric research stations everywhere.
They are not HARP. That's like saying you know that.
That's kind of like saying there's a Toyota Corolla in Gacona, Alaska,
and there are cars in other places, So there are
Toyota Corollas across the world. Okay, I see what you're saying.
(07:45):
At one point before we continue here, now, HARP itself
closed down, but it's not unusual for it to close down.
We have a lot of this stuff in our video
on HARP. Our latest video. One of my favorite titles uh,
what what the hell is going on at HARP or
what the hell are they doing at HARP or something
like that, something to that effect. And in there we
(08:07):
talk about the HARP station. There are other ion spheric
research facilities in the world across the world, but they
are not the HARP that we're harping on. I know,
I know, well they're okay, So this is the I
(08:27):
don't know what else I can say about this UM.
It's just it's fascinating to think it kind of harkens
back to the ideas of Tesla at least that's what
what that's what rings in my head when I think
about HARP and testing the ionosphere and what can you
do with it, although it has nothing to do with well,
at least to my knowledge, has nothing to do with
(08:49):
somehow connecting electrically to the ionosphere the way Tesla wanted to. Man,
we're gonna have to republish that Tesla video soon, aren't we. Yeah, yeah,
I'd like to do a whole new video on Tesla
UM because there's a lot of interest in it. And
you know, that was one of the situations where we
found there really was perhaps some stuff they don't want
(09:10):
you to know. And before we move on from the
subject of heart well, we we should point out that Matt,
as you said, it's not it's not a top secret
facility like Groom Lake, you know, or like the UM
whatever is happening on Diego Garcia, Right. This is this
(09:30):
is a place where while it was open, scientists would
be glad to give you knowledge. I'm sure there were
some things that were classified, but they would they would
be glad to give you a look at what they
were doing, talk to you about it if they had time. Uh.
You I don't know if you could just go up
there and get a tour. But it had a chain
leak fence around it. It's not a high value target
(09:53):
for a lot of people. The research that they were doing,
if we understand it correctly, is to see how changes
in the ionosphere can affect communication. That's one of the
big things. So this is big because it goes into
stuff like how uh an I CBM and inter intercontinental
(10:13):
ballistic missile would be able to guide itself or stay
guided right, uh, how radio communications could be altered or
even satellite and for it to affect the weather. What
what we were finding is that it would have to
be just from the kind of equipment to have, it
(10:34):
would have to be on a much more massive scale. Yes,
And it seems like it seems like at least the
Heart facility there in Gakona was not large enough to really,
uh you know, really shape the foundations of the Earth
and change the weather. But we have other ways of
changing the weather, and they're very old. They go back
(10:55):
to like World War One and stuff. Right, So what's
the what's the theoretical side? If if everything we do
know about Heart that's publicly available is smoke and mirrors,
smoke on the water right table at the oldies song,
then what what are the theories about Heart? So there
are several. One of the main ones that you hear
(11:16):
a lot is that it can somehow shoot an energy beam,
a radio energy beam into the ionosphere and then somehow
change the direction or by angling that beam in a
certain way two have it kind of arc around the
Earth and then come back down in a certain spot,
and then in that spot the ion sphere because it
(11:37):
has a connection with plate Earth movements, with tectonic movements,
um well, at least the tectonic movements seem to affect
the ionosphere, which does not necessarily mean the iono sphere
affects the tectonic movements. However, in this theory, because of
they've kind of aimed the iono sphere and changed it
(11:58):
a little bit and sent it downwards into the Earth,
it would create an earthquake in that position, right, And
we know that, as we said in our in our
videos that our our buddies moch Mood odd Menajade and
Ugo Chavez did say that bit sarcastically. Both um both
(12:19):
in two thousand and ten alleged that Harp directly was
involved with UH what was involved with creating natural disasters?
I think Amnijad, as we say in our video, UH
blamed the Pakistan floods on it, and Chavez blamed the
Haitian earthquake and um, well, and you made a great
(12:42):
point then that that one facility perhaps doesn't have the
power to do something to that effect. Is it possible
that there's a massive facility somewhere else, or what if
a lot of these ionospheric testing facilities are working together?
Ben Like, honestly, what if what if there are several
ionospheric testing facilities, say they're a couple in Europe somewhere.
(13:05):
There are a couple in Asia, couple in the US.
They all work together. Whoa man not bad? Not bad?
Idea a networked disaster club, right, highly improbable, but it
would be fascinating possible. I don't know you and I
haven't been everywhere. We'd have to go check it all
out first. One thing that we do know that sounds
(13:28):
crazy but is completely true, and we've covered this before
as well, is whether modification and this can relate to
natural disasters. But walk with us here for a second,
so you can shoot It turns out you can shoot
silver I had died into the sky. And although there
are varying degrees of success, there's a lot of healthy
(13:50):
skepticism about this. Uh. It seems that it has the
potential to create rain clouds. Well yes, but you you
certainly need the moisture in the air already in order
to make it happen. And it's something like forty I
think this success rate was less yeah, yeah, less more
(14:12):
than five. Uh, they've been they, being human beings history,
have tried to work with this existing technology and find
different ways to modify the weather. However, we know that
when experiments began with it in the United Kingdom. Uh,
there were reports that have triggered flooding. We know that
the largest weather modification network in the world, at least
(14:36):
the one that the public knows about, is in China.
And Uh there are people who have part time jobs
where they just shoot uh silver I died into the
clouds and hope that this could, hope that this could somehow,
you know, uh, provide favorable rain conditions for their local area. However,
(14:57):
we know that when when water gathers in one place,
it comes from somewhere right, So it's completely possible now
whether modification passed a certain threshold will create a situation
in which we will see, uh an increase in things
like droughts, or maybe an increase in frequency of flooding
(15:20):
or things like that. Because we're messing with the system,
we don't understand. I know how b movie that sounds,
but it's true, which brings us to the other point.
Climate change, man, climate change, climate change, global warming. It
used to be called and somebody won the buzzword war.
Somebody bernased it into a climate change instead of global warming. Yeah,
(15:43):
because it was so cold less I use bernais as
a verb. Now, Yeah, I don't think it sounds it
sounds like a sauce. So this is a massive topic.
This is a topic that I'm sure you, whoever you
are listening of this, you have some very strong opinions
about climate change. And it's tough for us because you know,
(16:09):
Ben and I want to learn the truth as or
at least as close to the truth as we can
possibly learn. That's what this show is about, and we
want to be able to tell it to you. The
problem is when you've got these extremely strong opinions, no
matter what you and I say, or what even the
science says, some people's minds will never be changed. Well,
(16:29):
let's present the gist. Okay, here's the gist. Uh. We've
got one side which says that there's one side that
says that human intervention is making a measurable impact in
the world. Of the primary arguments for a lot of
climate change stuff concern the effects of the human population
on the atmosphere. Right, so c O two emissions, Uh
(16:54):
get caught up in this. But you'll also hear stuff
about damage to the ozone layer, um, the amount of
pollution minted by factories and by motor vehicles, factory farming. Right,
I was gonna say, and and livestock, which are uh.
On our show, one of our other show's car stuff,
we have a great episode about whether whether cows or
(17:16):
cars are more responsible for pollution. Yeah, it's a really
weird thing to walk through, but I recommend if someone's
interest in that. So what what we have found is, UM.
We have found is that for a long time, the
people tied up in the research on this at invested
(17:40):
interest in some cases an agenda. There are cases where
evidence that didn't fit an official narrative was repressed. Um.
And in most of the cases that I've heard, this
was evidence where scientists would say, well, uh, we have
found this rise in temperature over this time. It correlates
to factors X, Y, and z. They're for we think
(18:01):
that human beings are having an effect. And then the
people who were funding the study you didn't want to
hear that, so they said, Okay, you know, go do
the math again. Yeah, just go do the math again
and if you want to keep your job. But then
on the other side, we have people who say that
there is a concentrated active conspiracy to propagate this idea
(18:26):
of enormous cataclysmic environmental change and that this, uh, this
is happening because there is um this is happening because
it's a way to scare people into giving up their
means of production, which would make it easier. A lot
of these ideas are tied up into the concept of
a one world government, new World order sort of thing.
(18:50):
The question then becomes one of scale. So the argument
here against climate change is often, you know, human beings
cannot do enough. We're not big enough really to affect
the great machine that is the world. Um you know,
just like harp is not big enough really to affect
(19:12):
the great machine that is the ionosphere. And and it's
strange because there can be there can be some contradictory
reasoning there. There can be people who don't believe that
climate change is real, but do believe that HARP controls
the weather, and so it's an interesting cognitive distance. But
one thing we do know is that when we talk
about scale, we're not just talking about amount to people
(19:35):
versus size of the world. We're talking about time of people.
So agriculture can cause climate change as well, because we're
changing the types of plants, are changing, type of livestock
that interact in a biome. So it's not necessarily a
worldwide climate change, right. Human beings can be possibly responsible
(19:57):
for things like desertification, where the desert just starts eating places, right,
and erosion. Human beings can clearly be responsible for erosion.
Climate change is not just a matter of calculating pollution, right. Um,
So there's the other part, and I know I'm going
on rant here, Matt, there's another part the here that
(20:19):
comes in with this, um, speaking of scale, the world's
climate system is extraordinarily complex. We don't really know what's
going on with it. Meteorologists are scarily accurate. Um within
you know, the short term before or after stuff, but
the further out you go, there just so many variables
(20:40):
that we don't really understand the system in which we're participating.
And whenever there is a huge chance for unintended consequences,
it usually means that there's not a clear cut, clean answer.
But human beings on the whole have already been changing
the you know, the quote unquote climate. The way in
(21:03):
which it's focused now, the way in which the debate
is framed, is designed to fool the average member of
the public into just dwelling on one aspect of how
human beings influenced the world, and um, could that create disasters?
Maybe I would just have to say, Ben, after listening
(21:25):
to Bill nye on talking on multiple things and people
like Nil deGrasse Tyson and other other people in the
field of science, that I respect their opinions, I would say,
because I am not a climatologist and not scientists. I
didn't go to school for any of that, um, so
it's difficult for me to really give an opinion that
(21:48):
in any way matters in any shape or form um. However,
I would say that from what I've learned from them,
the prevailing science says that that humans are affecting the
overall biome and the climate on the Earth. And the
conspiracy side would most definitely be that there are interests
(22:08):
in the energy field that would rather maintain the status
quo of you know, burning fossil fuels in our vehicles
and you know, having coal factories, clean coal factories, large farms. Yeah,
I think I think that would be the conspiracy side
in I also I also think that at this point
(22:32):
I haven't seen any compelling evidence of a attempts to
fake global warming, your climate change. I have seen compelling
evidence of attempts to suppress that that sort of ongoing research. Um.
And speaking of the interaction between business and science, Uh,
(22:55):
there's another thing that we did that we found out
was a truth is Stranger than action situation, right, Yes,
the and in our attempts to extract as much oil
as possible from the earth and natural gas and natural gas,
we've decided to come up with this thing called fracking.
(23:16):
And that's at least what we call it hydraulic fracturing.
And it's essentially it's a fairly simple well, it's not
a simple process. Obviously, it costs a lot of money.
It's complicated, but the idea is simple. You send down
a drill into the earth, into rocks, and then you
(23:36):
you force this highly pressurized liquid which is hydraulic liquid
and chemicals, waters and a couple of chemicals some I
think methylenes or something ease yes, and you force the
rocks to break open. You frack those rocks right open,
(23:57):
and that releases some of the natural gas that's trapped
in there, and the oil and the oil and all
the great things that you can burn for profit. So
there's an ongoing debate, you know this, Uh, this does
pose a risk to groundwater because it is forcing things
that are dangerous for human consumption into the ground and
(24:18):
through the water table deep into the ground. And UM,
the argument is there are safe way there, there are
safe ways to do it. How do you do it?
There are these wells wherein the used liquid is stored. Uh.
There are also some fairly compelling studies that surprise breaking
the breaking the rocks, under the under the mountains, under
(24:42):
the towns, under the cities, and the fields. UH that
this can make the ground unstables. Who who to thunk?
And it can make well? It can. The problem is
that UM, we can only estimate how much how much
the effect it would be in a lot of ways.
So it is possible that fracking can induce earthquakes, which
(25:05):
makes it a man made natural disaster. UM not the
same way that harp or UH. Going back to the
network of ionospheric UH, which is diabolical. I love it,
um if if it's not that same level, but it is.
It is possible, and in some cases people have already
(25:26):
started tracing fracking to earthquake events. I think specifically in
two thousand eight two thousand nine. Have a question though
about what what we have on Our outline is the
elephant in the room, Matt, which is human population and
global development. Are more natural disasters occurring or natural disasters
(25:51):
becoming more dangerous, more expensive? Or is it just that
there are more people in more places? Can Can I
just go with all of the above? Yeah, because well
sure there if you look at the Haiti earthquake, the
recent Haiti earthquake, there's so many people living just a
(26:11):
ton of people living in structures that are dangerous when
there's an earthquake, um, and that's how a lot of
people get hurt. Maybe if you live in a place
that is not prepared from a technology or an infrastructure
standpoint for this kind of natural disaster. If a hurricane
(26:31):
rolls through or a giant tornado rolls through in the
buildings in which a large group of people are living
in are not prepared for that, then that's how you
get disasters. That's how you get deaths, at least lots
of deaths. So it's yeah, that's I think that's a
very good point. We have more and more people, and
they're increasingly moving, so formerly inhospitable environments or environments that
(26:56):
are trans transitioning to an inhospitable state now because of
all the other people who were there. Uh, A lot
of the air in India and China is filthy on
a lot of the contamination problems that we sort of
kicked the can down the road on for a few
(27:16):
for a few decades, right are coming back to bite
us because people are moving into those areas. And what
what we're finding then is uh, what we're finding are
are some weird, ugly truth. One one of the questions
that I was thinking about asking you is if you
(27:39):
looked at it objectively, we're listeners that if all of
us were aliens, right, and everybody who listened to the
show arrived on a spaceship to check out Earth, would
we think that humans were the natural disaster? Well, we'd
probably think of them as a answer of some sort.
(28:01):
Joe Rogan has a great speech. Yeah when you he's
flying over l A and just looking right before he
got to l A, he's looking at California and the
beautiful just the way, man, this is an amazing looking planet.
And then all of a sudden, yeah, the protruding gray,
just nastiness and smoke. So yeah, Ben, I you know,
(28:24):
I think about even the matrix lines about humans being
a virus, and that stuff really resonates with me because
I I don't know. I feel I want to feel
more connected to the planet a lot of times, and
most of the time I don't. And I wonder if
that's just something ingreened or something that we have done
(28:47):
to ourselves, that we've programmed ourselves to feel separate. Hmm.
That's a good question, and that's sort of a in
some ways that sounds like a cultural or psychological disaster.
I think that what we're going to see over time
is is that if the technology does exist to create
(29:10):
natural disasters, to to create you know, gigantic earthquakes, mudslides
and so on. Um. Oh. Another side fact, North Korea
was mentioned as one of the places that was victimized
by natural disaster when they had I think a series
of floods a few years ago. But if that technology
um did exist, it would be something that world governments
(29:31):
and non government agencies or organizations tried to at least
have access to. We mentioned to quote several times once
and what the hell is fracking? And once in our
video on earthquakes, uh that Secretary Defense William Cohen talking
about the possibilities of future war, including stuff like tailored viruses, right,
(29:56):
tailored bugs to take out a certain population, right, scared
stuff and increasingly I won't say probable yet, but increasingly possible.
And then we've got the other one of the other
things he mentioned, And he's not the only one to
mentioned this. Uh. Foreign ministers in Russia mentioned this kind
of stuff too, the concept of eco terrorism destroying you know,
(30:19):
which is a which is an idea that goes way
back to siege days, you know, when you could destroy
your opponents access to food or clean water, right, or
just throw plague bodies into the well. That kind of stuff, Um, diabolical. Yeah,
but now on a worldwide scale. At this point we
(30:40):
should probably go. It looks like our buddies from a
stuff Mom never told you, or people are come by
the studio window and giving us the eye. Josh came
by a second ago, So we better get out of here. Uh, guys,
I hope you enjoyed this episode. We didn't have a
sponsor for this. For some reason, Illumination Global unlim It
had decided not to sponsor our episode. Um, I don't know,
(31:04):
maybe it is this is conflicting interests there's conflicting interests.
Just for this episode. They'll be back though. Yeah. Weirdly enough,
we just got a weather report that says a big
storm is moving name what oh oh man, you hear that? Yeah,
we're better, well, Matt. Where can people find us? Hopefully? Well?
You can find us on Facebook and Twitter. We're at
conspiracy Stuff. You can find us at our website. Our
(31:28):
brand spanking new, it's not brand spaking new. It's to
be fair, it's it's a little old now brands making
new stuff on it. That's right. Stuff. They don't want
you to know. Dot Com the longest year r L.
But you will be so satisfied once you've entered it.
It's about the journey, that's right. Also, if you want
to skip all that social media stuff and just contact
us directly, we have a new email address. You can
(31:50):
contact us at conspiracy at how stuff works dot com.
From more on this topic, another unexplained phenomenon, visit test
tube dot com slash conspiracy stuff. You can also get
in touch on Twitter at the handle at conspiracy Stuff.
(32:32):
M
Stuff They Don't Want You To Know News
Hosts And Creators
Matt Frederick
Ben Bowlin
Noel Brown
Show Links
RSSStoreAboutLive ShowsPopular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.