Microwave Interfacing With Humans

Igotadose wrote: »

Have you got a point? Do a little work, don't just dump links.

There is too much material to cover in posts. But, the articles outline an orbiting microwave-based system able to read and write to the human brain and body. It based on a 10 year investigation spanning much of the globe and input from a wide variety of sources.


It speculates that this was the weapon used in the attacks on diplomatic and CIA staff in both Cuba and China, then goes on to outline the operational goals, the technology and basis of operation.


Very interesting, but you need to know quite a bit to keep up.

King Mob wrote: »

But this investigation seems to be some random anonymous person with a blog.
How do you know it's not just madey-uppey?

The articles tracks with the reports coming from analysis of the Cuba and China attacks. It preceeded those reports.


https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/01/science/sonic-attack-cuba-microwave.html


There are scientific papers listed which support the interface technique, he pinpoints the likely tech used to deliver that and the dates of development match, the rest of it tracks with reports found all over the web.


Its also consistent with the training being provided to US government staff. The key difference is he claims this stretches back to the 50s and 60s, a view widely held by many others.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUtQbriWt64

King Mob wrote: »

What scientific papers show that there's is an orbital weapon that is controled by an AI and can "wipe peoples brains and bodies".

That seems like the madey-uppy part.

Read. I'm busy right now.

King Mob wrote: »

No thanks.
Often times when conspiracy theorists claim that we should "read this giant list of unsourced blog articles" or "watch this 3 hour long rambling youtube video" or "google it", it means that the information is not actually there.

You claimed that you have proper scientific papers that show there's an orbital microwave weapon.
Please show these papers.

A random unsourced blog is not convincing.
Please post scientific papers from credible journals.

All the material is in the links provided. I appreciate what you are saying, but if you don't want to explore conspiracy theory, debate it, etc., then why are you here?


Read it or don't, its your call, but there is no point in discussing it with people who haven't read the material.

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Which 10 year investigation, and what is the source?

DeepThought spent 10 years investigating the technology, the effects, the people, etc. and travelled around the world monitoring its presence and what it was doing. He gathered information from every available source, confirmed the physics and even put a lot of pressure on the prime suspects. His work is a mixture of his own and hundreds of other sources.

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Indeed, can you give the specific source for that 10 year investigation and this orbiting system?

You're dealing with the crown jewels of intelligence in multiple nations, systematic attacks of various civilian populations and even suspected mass murder of US Navy staff. What do you expect here, a signed confession?


I think you need to evaluate the work for yourself. Big trousers time mate.

FanadMan wrote: »

Those links are NOT scientific papers! They are deluded ramblings by some nutjob. If they are scientific papers, where is the peer review? Where is the corroboration by recognised and published professionals?

BTW, i think that there is only one troll in this thread and they created their account less than a month ago.....probably just to get views on their strange blog.

No one said those links were scientific papers. It was stated that they link to scientific papers.


I smell another troll account. Let's see a clear Ad Hominem, a little dash of a Strawman Argument, a twist of Hasty Generalization, a portion of Red Herring, a sprinkling of Causal Fallacy, a dab of Appeal to Authority and a nice topping with the start of a Bandwagon.


Quite professional, but I've been round the block a few times. So, foreign operated troll accounts?

Fionn1952 wrote: »

I thought I'd give a hand to move the narrative along in here.

Ok, I'll bite.

Fionn1952 wrote: »

Going through the first link, there are absolutely no links to scientific papers. The author of the blog repeatedly refers to research, but does not link to it, and makes it clear that it's his own research. It's circular logic to use your own non peer-reviewed, 'research' to support an argument in favour of what you set out to prove with said research.

I would agree with you if it were not for the fact that this first article was written in response to attacks on diplomatic staff in Cuba and China, prior to any released reported. The article was the first to publicly identify the sound as a result of microwave interfacing.


As you will learn, if you read up on the latest research, even those professionals not privy to the nature of the weapon have since concluded that it was microwave-based and that the sound was a product of that.


So, that would place DeepThought more than a year ahead of the public investigation and, perhaps, ahead of the FBI who were still claiming it was an absurd device called a sonic weapon.


So, anyone reading that would be ahead of the pack.

Fionn1952 wrote: »

Even ignoring that, his research seems to consist entirely of anecdotal evidence from unnamed sources, and his own extrapolations as to what that means. Clearly below the standard of research Spooner has implied was contained within the material.

Its par for the course when dealing with many things in the world of intelligence. What you're more interested in is, given the tech, do these things sound plausible? If so, its a given someone will be trying this. The military applications are obvious.

Fionn1952 wrote: »

For example he makes the claim, "However, after nearly a decade of research alongside input by various specialists, former government agents, whistleblowers spanning the entire world the rather disturbing conclusion that we were looking at some form of microwave weapon".....with no reference to the actual research carried out, or a single one of his sources.

DeepThought is very well known, as his investigation series, having started on Newsvine in 2010. The comments are littered with conversations and information about the system, spanning many years. There is no doubt he did exactly what he claimed. The articles are probably more geared towards those that dig into things, rather than those that need spoon fed like a baby and every claim proved.

Fionn1952 wrote: »

He claims, 'It took many years, but I eventually developed a range of workable theories on the transceiver technology.' without providing any schematics on his theoretical designs or even the most basic information beyond his claim.

He does discuss the technology and principles of operation later in the series. This was a large portion of the work begun around 2010. It has been iterated over many times in the last decade in light of new information and his own improved understanding. The current speculated design he has is quite functional.

Fionn1952 wrote: »

He follows up with, "From clear localised heating, to RF interference in SDR equipment, from RF burns to clear beams passing through rooms, I got to see it all. Rather than being timid, withdrawing and maintaining cover, I observed a system that was blatant and aggressive." once more failing to give actual results or data.

Over the years, he has uploaded everything from photographs of RF burns, to raw IQ data on intercepted signals, as well as waterfall plots, etc. Much of that was done prior to 2013 though. He seems to have focused more on the AGI, theory of mind and psyops after that. I think its all about making AGI less gullible. But he still keeps tabs on the microwave stuff.

Fionn1952 wrote: »

I could literally write a blog tomorrow, with all the scientific accuracy and authority of this blog, I'll claim that Spooner is actually a covert government agent, posting easily discredited nonsense about microwave weaponry to distract us from the REAL truth about them, which I've researched since 2006, I worked with COUNTLESS microwave physics researchers, government researchers and a highly prestigious US university, who have turned double agent just to provide me this information, and we have concluded that they're using these microwave beams to make me, personally put on weight. I can only conclude that I am incredibly special, and that's why I'm being targeted.

I doubt it. I don't need to take his work on faith like yourself. I can validate if the interface is functional, the rest is just human nature, isn't it?

Fionn1952 wrote: »

You've possibly been taken in by a veneer of scientific language, but there's precisely zero actual science in this blog post. It doesn't inspire much faith that the remaining links will contain much in the ways of proper research.

The science comes later. I think these descriptions are more for people who get it and need to understand what mentality they are dealing with, as well as operational use cases. I suppose how it is used, or how it is to be used as well as understanding the depths these people will go to, is a good guide.


I suppose he doesn't waste time with people trying to prove the interface, he just says, there it is. If you can't understand it, or don't want to understand it, that's your problem. Obviously, there are people out there who are paid to both get it and not get it.

Fionn1952 wrote: »

Perhaps if you could narrow it down for me and let me know which of the blog posts contain actual research, I could have a look at some actual data before going back to read the author's conclusions? If you're very familiar with the author's work, it should be almost no effort whatsoever for you to tell me one or two of the blog posts which focus on hard data. When I've had a read through these, then we can move on to the conclusionary side of the discussion?

You seem to have the same reading disability. Is it contagious in these forums? You can't debate something you have no read. Don't be daft. If you want to join in, take some time out and read.

Fionn1952 wrote: »

So essentially it's just appeal to authority, a gish gallop and ad hominem?

Perhaps you're familiar with the concept of the burden of proof?

Perhaps those using the microwave weapons are also familiar with the term?