SPACE-BASED LASER BEING USED TO DELIBERATELY CUT MASSIVE ANTARCTIC ICE

that's a 60 foot tall, straight edge, with a corner that just broke off at a 90 degree angle???

I find it very hard to believe that this could happen naturally since I have never seen a square iceberg photo before...

(suspicious in the same way that the twin towers came down so evenly)

Wow, I want a power source that can generate enough to fuel a high-powered continuous laser beam for long enough to make 45-mile-long cuts!


For a fuckwit that claims to be in the Navy, I would think that you already knew military planes could do this. Oh wait, maybe it's the air force that has this capability, we use people like you to keep ship decks nice and shiny. Keep scrubbing biatch

No need for any laser. Just put an open wire on ice and heat it up by running current through it.

Someone really needs to get pissed off at this then!

VIDEO SHOWS PERFECT 45 MILE LONG STRAIGHT-LINE CUTS AND PERFECT RIGHT ANGLE CUTS

Someone is mis-using extremely powerful, SPACE-BASED military weapons to intentionally alter the amount of ice melting into the oceans.

Video proves a laser or highly focused microwave weapon is being used; the cuts in the massive ice shelf are PERFECTLY straight. The right angle cuts are PERFECT right angle cuts. These cuts, some 45 miles long, do not and CANNOT happen naturally.

If this continues, the massive amounts of fresh water ice being deliberately cut - which later later melt into the sea - will cause a "critical desalination" of ocean waters, leading to a massive shift in the gulf stream and sudden, dramatic change in planetary weather similar to what was seen in the movie "The Day After Tomorrow."

"Global Warming" is actually being caused through mis-use of government weapons - not by normal human activity. Government is intentionally doing this and they are putting all of us at grave risk.

[link to news.bbc.co.uk]

For a fuckwit that claims to be in the Navy, I would think that you already knew military planes could do this. Oh wait, maybe it's the air force that has this capability, we use people like you to keep ship decks nice and shiny. Keep scrubbing biatch


Nah, I'm a mechanical engineer. I don't doubt we have the ability to make a laser that can cut ice, but the problem with making cuts 45 miles long is power. What can generate continuous power for that long at that intensity?

No need for any laser. Just put an open wire on ice and heat it up by running current through it.


So we now have an open wire 45 miles long using resistance heating to melt sixty feet of ice.

Tell me, as the wire sinks down into the ice shelf, what's going to keep the water above it from freezing back into ice again?

And where are the huge generators at each end of the wire that are generating those megawatts of electricity?

Nah, I'm a mechanical engineer. I don't doubt we have the ability to make a laser that can cut ice, but the problem with making cuts 45 miles long is power. What can generate continuous power for that long at that intensity?

I don't doubt we have the ability to make a laser that can cut ice, but the problem with making cuts 45 miles long is power. What can generate continuous power for that long at that intensity?

Wow, I want a power source that can generate enough to fuel a high-powered continuous laser beam for long enough to make 45-mile-long cuts!


For a fuckwit that claims to be in the Navy, I would think that you already knew military planes could do this. Oh wait, maybe it's the air force that has this capability, we use people like you to keep ship decks nice and shiny. Keep scrubbing biatch

No. Military planes can't do this.

You're probably thinking about the ABL or Airborne laser Program, which has a converted Boeing 747 freighter with a chemical laser to blast a potential ICBM while still in boost phase. Here is some real info on this:

[link to www.boeing.com]

Have you ever though how much energy it would take to do this ice shelf stuff? It's not hard to figure out, if you've taken a couple of post-high school math courses.

If you assume the "cut" is a line 45 miles long by 50 feet deep by one inch wide, and if you assume that the temperature of the ice is only one degree below freezing, then you will have to raise about a million cubic feet of ice one degree. Since a pound of ice weighs 67 lb, you must melt 66,300,000 pounds of ice (and do it quickly before it freezes again).

Since it takes 1 BTU to raise one pound of water (or ice) one degree, you will need to generate 66.3 million BTUs over a fairly short (say one minute) period of time. I'm using a minute to do the whole deed since the ice sheet would quickly freeze again once the heat source was removed.

So if you had a device which would provide that heat (and let's assume that there's no energy loss during transmission which, of course, there would be) you would need a device which would produce 1.1 million BTUs of heat energy per second, which is about a much as five Palo Verde powerplants here in Arizona (the world's largest nuclear power plant) can produce.

Now think about how big the whizz-bang up in space (which we've never even seen) would have to be to produce that much energy.

Think about what the energy losses would be in the transmission of that energy, especially as it travels through the atmosphere.

And think about why no astronomer in the southern hemisphere reported a huge minute long blaze of light while the "cut" was made.

It simply doesn't add up.