1965-69:Precedessors to the Plattville Fascilitiy (USA, USSR)
1970:Platteville, Colorado (Central United States)
1975:SURA (Nizhni Novgorod), Russia, 1976 the time of thewoodpecker
signals that stunned and "attacked" parts of central United States
back then.
1976:UN Convention of environmental modification techniques (See
letter below!)
1980:Arecibo (Puerto Rico), HIPAS (Alaska, United States)
1993:Tromsų (EISCAT, Norway a joint programme with european (NATO,
USA), and asian countries)
1995:HAARP (Alaska, United States)
2003:SPEAR (Svalbard, Norway)(NATO, USA)


UNITED NATIONS, NATIONS UNIES

Reference C.N.263.1978. Treaties-12  27 October 1978

Convention on the prohibtion of military or any other hostile use of
enviromental modification techniques.

Approved by the general assembly of the United Nations on 10 December
1976

Transmission of certified true copies of the convention rectification
of the certified true copies (English tesxt) of the convention

Sir, I have the honour, upon instructions from the Secretary-General,
to transmit herewith two certified true copies of the Convention on
the Prohibition of Military or Any other Hostile Use of Environmental
Modification Techniques, approved by the General Assembly of the
United Nations on 10 December 1976.

You will note, however, that these texts are certified true copies
subjects, in the English text, to the capitalization of the
word "earth" in the third line of article II and the deletion of the
comma after the word "Convention" at the end of the third line in
article VIII (3), so as to conform to the original.

Accept, Sir, the assurances of my highest consideration.

Erik Suy
The Legal Counsel


Sent to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Member States

Comments to the Convention (not by UN);

Notice that the date of this cover letter was 27 October 1978, which
means that this treaty was in effect at the time this certified true
copy was mailed. The name of the treaty is "CONVENTION ON THE
PROHIBITION OF MILITARY OR ANY OTHER HOSTILE USE OF ENVIRONMENTAL
MODIFICATION TECHNIQUES APPROVED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE
UNITED NATIONS ON 10 DECEMBER 1976".

This title alone tells us conclusively that scientists of at least
several nations who have a history of being hostile to one another
now possess scientific knowledge that can control damaging weather to
the point of being able to use such weather as hostile, destructive
weapons. Exactly which countries possess this damaging capability is
not clear; however, we know that, in this 20th Century, Western
Capitalism has been nose-to-nose with Eastern Russian Communism.
Therefore, we can only conclude that both Russia and America possess
this technology.

I hope this may contribute to once for all take away the common
confusion that ionospheric heaters were not present when the first
signs of the Hum were present.

If this still do not sink in, I am afraid methods like spamming have
to be used. I hope everyone agree, this is a method we do not like in
this forum!

Therefore I hope that we all should agree that from the late 1960'ies
ionospheric heaters were a knowledge that where to be a fact from
that time, and that this technology have advanced from thereon, which
I without no doubt relate to the problem that have made birth to this
forum.

I agree with hotnite2's theory that it is one source
with the possibility that there multiple locations.

I'm waiting tonight, Friday, to see what happens at
10:20 pm Pacific Time.
Hum on all day, inside and outside--it is terrible.
Patty, northern CA

--- hotnite2 <horizon99@...> wrote:
> --- In humforum@yahoogroups.com, Tobypaws2002@a...
> wrote:
> > In a message dated 29/04/2004 22:59:29 GMT
> Daylight Time,
> > sugarpineinc@y... writes:
> >
> > > >The fact that the hum is most frequently
> described
> > > >very much the same, occurs at the same times,
> etc.,
> > > points to a common source.
> > > >Yet, it is heard in Taos, NM just as it is
> here, in
> > > >NJ, 2000 miles away.  What industrial source
> could
> > > possibly generate anything like that?  It would
> have
> > > to have enormous energy and be pretty obvious at
> the
> > > source.
> > >
> >
> > Hi, I did not mean only one installation for
> everyone! I meant
> many
> > instalations in many different places. The effects
> and perceptions
> of the noise might
> > be very similar, but that does not mean they all
> have the same
> single cause. It
> > is a huge subject, but if everyone keeps searching
> ,  thinking,
> and
> > questioning, we might solve the puzzle one day!
> > By the way, I think Patty asked when did HAARP
> start, and was The
> Hum on
> > before that? Answer,  Yes, Hum started for many
> people long before
> 1996, which is
> > partly why I do not seriously include HAARP as a
> possible culprit,
> until
> > someone can explain the mechanisms involved, and
> suggest a
> practical test we can
> > try to do, somewhere...
> > Best Wishes,
> > R.M., in England.
>
>
>
> If it's not a common source, then I think it's
> pretty unusual that
> so many people in such different locations around
> the world describe
> it very much the same and it occurs mostly at the
> same times.
> People also generally say they notice it inside, and
> less, if at all
> outside.  None of that appears to be consistent with
> multiple
> industrial sources.  Nor the fact that many of the
> places are far
> away from any heavy industry.
>
> And if it were from many industrial sources, it
> seems very likely
> someone would have located at least some of them
> long ago.  For
> example, if it's some industrial operation, people
> must work there.
> Sooner or later someone would say, geee that hum in
> the NY Times
> article sounds like the metal forge where I work.
>
> Look at what happened in Kokomo.  They quickly
> identified two
> industrial sources of noise, in the area, but
> neither appears to be
> the likely culprit.  How much further away should
> they look?  And
> what would be the likelihood that some other
> industrial location
> 2000 miles away would produce the same type of
> sound, at the same
> time, with the same characteristics?
>
>





__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover

The chronology and information is impressive,
humlobotomist, but please explain your statement...
"If this still do not sink in, I am afraid methods
like spamming have to be used. I hope everyone agree,
this is a method we do not like in this forum!
Thank you.

--- humlobotomist <humlobotomist@...> wrote:
> 1965-69:Precedessors to the Plattville Fascilitiy
> (USA, USSR)
> 1970:Platteville, Colorado (Central United States)
> 1975:SURA (Nizhni Novgorod), Russia, 1976 the time
> of thewoodpecker
> signals that stunned and "attacked" parts of central
> United States
> back then.
> 1976:UN Convention of environmental modification
> techniques (See
> letter below!)
> 1980:Arecibo (Puerto Rico), HIPAS (Alaska, United
> States)
> 1993:Tromsų (EISCAT, Norway a joint programme with
> european (NATO,
> USA), and asian countries)
> 1995:HAARP (Alaska, United States)
> 2003:SPEAR (Svalbard, Norway)(NATO, USA)
>
>
> UNITED NATIONS, NATIONS UNIES
>
> Reference C.N.263.1978. Treaties-12  27 October 1978
>
> Convention on the prohibtion of military or any
> other hostile use of
> enviromental modification techniques.
>
> Approved by the general assembly of the United
> Nations on 10 December
> 1976
>
> Transmission of certified true copies of the
> convention rectification
> of the certified true copies (English tesxt) of the
> convention
>
> Sir, I have the honour, upon instructions from the
> Secretary-General,
> to transmit herewith two certified true copies of
> the Convention on
> the Prohibition of Military or Any other Hostile Use
> of Environmental
> Modification Techniques, approved by the General
> Assembly of the
> United Nations on 10 December 1976.
>
> You will note, however, that these texts are
> certified true copies
> subjects, in the English text, to the capitalization
> of the
> word "earth" in the third line of article II and the
> deletion of the
> comma after the word "Convention" at the end of the
> third line in
> article VIII (3), so as to conform to the original.
>
> Accept, Sir, the assurances of my highest
> consideration.
>
> Erik Suy
> The Legal Counsel
>
>
> Sent to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Member
> States
>
> Comments to the Convention (not by UN);
>
> Notice that the date of this cover letter was 27
> October 1978, which
> means that this treaty was in effect at the time
> this certified true
> copy was mailed. The name of the treaty is
> "CONVENTION ON THE
> PROHIBITION OF MILITARY OR ANY OTHER HOSTILE USE OF
> ENVIRONMENTAL
> MODIFICATION TECHNIQUES APPROVED BY THE GENERAL
> ASSEMBLY OF THE
> UNITED NATIONS ON 10 DECEMBER 1976".
>
> This title alone tells us conclusively that
> scientists of at least
> several nations who have a history of being hostile
> to one another
> now possess scientific knowledge that can control
> damaging weather to
> the point of being able to use such weather as
> hostile, destructive
> weapons. Exactly which countries possess this
> damaging capability is
> not clear; however, we know that, in this 20th
> Century, Western
> Capitalism has been nose-to-nose with Eastern
> Russian Communism.
> Therefore, we can only conclude that both Russia and
> America possess
> this technology.
>
> I hope this may contribute to once for all take away
> the common
> confusion that ionospheric heaters were not present
> when the first
> signs of the Hum were present.
>
> If this still do not sink in, I am afraid methods
> like spamming have
> to be used. I hope everyone agree, this is a method
> we do not like in
> this forum!
>
> Therefore I hope that we all should agree that from
> the late 1960'ies
> ionospheric heaters were a knowledge that where to
> be a fact from
> that time, and that this technology have advanced
> from thereon, which
> I without no doubt relate to the problem that have
> made birth to this
> forum.
>
>





__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover

I apology this maybe a little hard comment. It was a little irony, to
tell that this have been informed of before.

And what I meant would be spamming, was to repeat this info again and
again. But of course, new members are coming into this forum, but
this comments was meant to those who have read this before, and still
advocating that the Hum can not be caused by ionospheric heaters,
since HAARP where not in place before 1996, when this info have been
discussed but maybe forgotten as fast as the message was closed, of
course a all too fast conclusion to forget about this so fast.

--- In humforum@yahoogroups.com, "P. Crawford" <sugarpineinc@y...>
wrote:
> The chronology and information is impressive,
> humlobotomist, but please explain your statement...
> "If this still do not sink in, I am afraid methods
> like spamming have to be used. I hope everyone agree,
> this is a method we do not like in this forum!
> Thank you.
>
> --- humlobotomist <humlobotomist@y...> wrote:
> > 1965-69:Precedessors to the Plattville Fascilitiy
> > (USA, USSR)
> > 1970:Platteville, Colorado (Central United States)
> > 1975:SURA (Nizhni Novgorod), Russia, 1976 the time
> > of thewoodpecker
> > signals that stunned and "attacked" parts of central
> > United States
> > back then.
> > 1976:UN Convention of environmental modification
> > techniques (See
> > letter below!)
> > 1980:Arecibo (Puerto Rico), HIPAS (Alaska, United
> > States)
> > 1993:Tromsų (EISCAT, Norway a joint programme with
> > european (NATO,
> > USA), and asian countries)
> > 1995:HAARP (Alaska, United States)
> > 2003:SPEAR (Svalbard, Norway)(NATO, USA)
> >
> >
> > UNITED NATIONS, NATIONS UNIES
> >
> > Reference C.N.263.1978. Treaties-12  27 October 1978
> >
> > Convention on the prohibtion of military or any
> > other hostile use of
> > enviromental modification techniques.
> >
> > Approved by the general assembly of the United
> > Nations on 10 December
> > 1976
> >
> > Transmission of certified true copies of the
> > convention rectification
> > of the certified true copies (English tesxt) of the
> > convention
> >
> > Sir, I have the honour, upon instructions from the
> > Secretary-General,
> > to transmit herewith two certified true copies of
> > the Convention on
> > the Prohibition of Military or Any other Hostile Use
> > of Environmental
> > Modification Techniques, approved by the General
> > Assembly of the
> > United Nations on 10 December 1976.
> >
> > You will note, however, that these texts are
> > certified true copies
> > subjects, in the English text, to the capitalization
> > of the
> > word "earth" in the third line of article II and the
> > deletion of the
> > comma after the word "Convention" at the end of the
> > third line in
> > article VIII (3), so as to conform to the original.
> >
> > Accept, Sir, the assurances of my highest
> > consideration.
> >
> > Erik Suy
> > The Legal Counsel
> >
> >
> > Sent to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Member
> > States
> >
> > Comments to the Convention (not by UN);
> >
> > Notice that the date of this cover letter was 27
> > October 1978, which
> > means that this treaty was in effect at the time
> > this certified true
> > copy was mailed. The name of the treaty is
> > "CONVENTION ON THE
> > PROHIBITION OF MILITARY OR ANY OTHER HOSTILE USE OF
> > ENVIRONMENTAL
> > MODIFICATION TECHNIQUES APPROVED BY THE GENERAL
> > ASSEMBLY OF THE
> > UNITED NATIONS ON 10 DECEMBER 1976".
> >
> > This title alone tells us conclusively that
> > scientists of at least
> > several nations who have a history of being hostile
> > to one another
> > now possess scientific knowledge that can control
> > damaging weather to
> > the point of being able to use such weather as
> > hostile, destructive
> > weapons. Exactly which countries possess this
> > damaging capability is
> > not clear; however, we know that, in this 20th
> > Century, Western
> > Capitalism has been nose-to-nose with Eastern
> > Russian Communism.
> > Therefore, we can only conclude that both Russia and
> > America possess
> > this technology.
> >
> > I hope this may contribute to once for all take away
> > the common
> > confusion that ionospheric heaters were not present
> > when the first
> > signs of the Hum were present.
> >
> > If this still do not sink in, I am afraid methods
> > like spamming have
> > to be used. I hope everyone agree, this is a method
> > we do not like in
> > this forum!
> >
> > Therefore I hope that we all should agree that from
> > the late 1960'ies
> > ionospheric heaters were a knowledge that where to
> > be a fact from
> > that time, and that this technology have advanced
> > from thereon, which
> > I without no doubt relate to the problem that have
> > made birth to this
> > forum.

>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
> http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover

I did some more experiments...

1) Stayed a night in the metal building next to my house, and
    although I could still hear the hum, it was very faint. I
    felt better the next morning.

2) Next I tried sitting in my car with windows rolled up and I
    could still hear the hum, though very faint.

3) I drove around to see if I could find the source. I could hear
    the hum a few blocks away from my house, though if I drove in
    a particular direction, I couldn't hear the hum. This indicated
    to me that the hum is coming from a certain place.

After much driving around, I found a new building about a mile from
my house with some sort of incredibly loud machine on the roof. It's
an emergency surgury building. The machine is so loud that I can't
tell if it's the source of the particular hum that I hear from my
house. Also, I believe from ground level, the sound I hear coming
from the machine on the roof may be different than if heard from a
higher elevation (which my house is).

Does this mean that I should still investigate gas lines etc?

Also, there are am/fm radio antennas near my house as well.

Mike

If some are interested, downloading of the file on the following link
will be very informative regarding ionospheric heaters such as HAARP
and EISCAT. It also gives an clue to understand how these experiments
are conducted by these fascilities, also help you to understand that
they produce low frequency waves that may be perceived as the Hum.

Consider this PowerPoint presentation as educational material
regading ionospheric heaters, and as a process in investigating the
Hum. The file is rather big, 23MB, but itis no problem with broadband
internet connections, others with modem should think twice before
downloading, due to this may take some time with modem.

Rightclick on your mousebutton on following link, and choose "save
target as" in the up-popping dialog box;

http://www.eiscat.uit.no/heating/EISCAT_Heating.ppt

Choose a location where to save this file, and then open normal
in PowerPoint.

NB! You need to have PowerPoint, Microsoft Office to able to read
this file.

ALL MEMBERS, PLEASE REPLY TO THESE QUESTIONS and thanks to those who
have replied so far.

Replies from Taos and Kokomo reqested. please indetify with T or K
with suffix of C for city or R for Rural.

1. HUM?
2. THROB?
3. HUM AND THROB?
4. THROB FREQUENCY?
5. HUM FREQUENCY NEAREST MATCH ON PIANO COUNT KEYS FROM LOW END
(LEFT).

6. HEARD ONLY INSIDE BUILDINGS?
6A. DOES IT DISPPEAR WHEN YOU CROSS THE THRESHOLD OR PUT YOUR HEAD
THROUGH A WINDOW (CROSS THE THRESHOLD0?
7. HEARD OUTSID IN THE OPEN? IF SO UNDER WHAT CIRCUMSTANCES
IE NIGHT TIME QUIET, NO WIND ETC.
8. HEARD IN STATIONARY CLOSED CAR WITH ALL SYSTEMS QUIET.
9. HEARD EVERYWHERE? IE LOCAL, WIDER AREA.
10. PLACES WHERE NOT HEARD. IE ABROAD, IF SO WHERE IS IT QUIET.
11. HEARD AT SEA? IE UNDER QUIET CONDITIONS, ON DECK , INSIDE CLOSED
CABIN.
12. HEARD IN THE AIR? IE QUIET CONDITIONS, BALLOON RIDE, GLIDER IN
STALL CONDITION.

13. DID YOU BECOME AWARE OF THE SOUND YOURSELF? WHAT WERE THE
CONDITIONS AT THE TIME?
14. DID SOMEONE ELSE MAKE YOU AWARE BY EXPLAINING THE LISTENING
PROCESS? UNDER WHAT CONDITIONS?

15. HAVE YOU MADE ANY OTHER PERSON AWARE?
15B.IF SO ARE FAMILY MEMBERS?
15C. RELATED?
15D. OTHERS?

16. DO YOU FIND THAT OTHER NOISES TONES INTERFERE WITH THE NOISE?
IE BEAT WITH IT?

17. PHYSICAL EFFECTS.
17A. UPSET YOUR BALANCE? IE WALK INTO DOOR JAMS.
17B. FEEL IT OR HEAR IT.
17C. EFFECT YOUR SLEEP? IE REDUCE IT, CAN ONLY SLEEP PROPERLY WHEN
EXHAUSTED, FIND YOUSELF LIVING BETWEEN 2 LEVELS OF EXHAUSTION
IE SLEEP LEVEL WAKE UP LEVEL.

18. DOES THE NOISE EFFECT YOUR HEARING?
18A.FEEL LIKE YOUR EARS ARE STUFFED WITH COTTON WOOL, NEED TO POKE
EAR TO STOP IRRITATION.
18B.DO YOU HEAR A HIGH PITCHED WHISTLE TYPE OF NOISE THAT SWITCHES ON
OR OFF?
18C.DO YOU FEEL SUDDEN SEEMING PRESSURE WAVE TYPE CHANGES FOLLOWED BY
A HIGH PITCHED WHISTLE OR SOMETHING SIMILAR.
18D. IF IT DOES SWITCH IS IT RELATED TO VARIATION IN THE NOISE?

19. DO HEAR AN IRREGULAR POPPING?

20. DOES THE NOISE DISAPPEAR AFTER EXPOSURE TO LOUD NOISE SOURCES OR
AFTER A NOISY JOURNEY?
21. DOES ALCOHOL HELP YOU SLEEP?
22. WHAT WAS THE DATE WHEN YOU FIRST HEARD IT?
23. ANY OTHER COMENTS?

Energy and other domestic supplies.
24. what are the energy supplies in your area?
24a. Electricity? transformers nearby?
24b. Electricity windfarms? If so, how far to windfarm?
24c. Natural Gas?
Piped? local supply?
distant supply by high pressure pipeline? if so, what pressure where
from? Pipe and pressure may be found on markers at highway cross
points.
25. Water supplies.
25a. local gravity fed reservoir? local storage towers?
25b. subsurface extraction?  local store towers?
25c. distant pumped supply?  local store towers?
25d. processed river extraction? local storage towers?

I do believe that many fellow Hum sufferers agree that the Hum has
increased in the periods it can be perceived. Before the millennium
shift, the hum could be heard occasionally.

But as the years have passed on, it has changed to that the presence
of the Hum is more the normal, than the absence of the Hum. The
presence of the Hum is rule, and silence is the exception of the
normal.

To show that my theory may have some weight, I can document
following; The EISCAT ionospheric heating facility has increased its
operation time from approximately 200 hours a in year, back in year
2000, up to approximately 4000 hours a year in 2002.
4000 hour is close to 6 of the 12 months in a year.

What is the number of hours used for experimentation at present year
in 2004? We can only guess. And we must also keep in mind that EISCAT
is one of many. Most likely HAARP whom quite surely outnumbers EISCAT
in resources put in funding, do an even more extensive testing and
experimentation than EISCAT in the present year, due to that HAARP is
the main part of the rocket shield system that the US government have
scheduled fully operational during October 2004.

Please look the jpeg files area in this forum; "Document showing
operational hours spent in year 2000 and 2002 at EISCAT", documenting
the increase of experimenting / operational time of the "European
part" of the rocket shield.

What I am trying to imply, is that this increased activity in
operation of the ionospheric heating facilities, also could explain
the increase of nearly an always presence of the Hum.

Contacting a university representing only yourself would not carry
nearly as much weight as having a state or federally organized body
representing thousands do so. This is why my challenge is for someone
to start organizing us hum sufferers. We can speculate endlessly and
individual efforts, while worthwhile, are unlikely to bring the
result that group action will. Alas, I, like apparently the rest of
us, don't have the resolution to take this on.

I am disappointed that Bill Curry, Angelo Campagnella, and David
Demming have not responded yet. They are quite clearly the most
capable to at least propose an experimental approach and even stand
to gain since such a proposed group action may result in funding for
their consulting businesses. On the other hand, of the three, only
Prof Demming is a sufferer so I can understand why it is not their
cross to bear.


--- In humforum@yahoogroups.com, Linda Callaway <lbcallaway@y...>
wrote:
> The DOD suggested that I contact a major university's Physics
department.  That I did, only to be informed that they did not have
the personnel or the monitoring equipment to investigate this hum.
Please read all that you can on the HEP (High Energy Physics)
research going on with DOD and DOE.  If you have not done so, check
Carnicom's narratives on weather engineering via chemtrails.  It is
also interesting to find that now there is some chatter about adverse
effects of Cipro and quinolone classes of anti-biotics, such as
Levoquin.  There are those that claim side effects including
tinnitus, irregular heartbeat, joint and muscle pain, fatigue, etc.,
that mimic what I believe it EMF sensitivity and a reaction to the
components in the aerial spraying research.  Food for thought.
>
> hortonhearsahum <hortonhearsahum@y...> wrote:Hi everyone,
>
> I have been quite busy lately and not contributing much to this
forum
> but continue to check in once in a while. There has been much
> speculation and investigation of various ideas as to the cause of
the
> hum phenomenon and it is by and large very interesting and
fruitful.
> However, to make any real progress, someone somewhere is going to
> have to do a series of controlled, systematic investigations in
order
> to better understand what is actually going on. Since there are
> several trained scientists participating on this board, I was
hopeful
> that one or more of them might propose something but that doesn't
> seem to have happened yet so I'd like to try to get the ball
rolling.
>
> So, how do we go about inspiring one or more researchers to perform
a
> series of experiments with the purpose of identifying the cause of
> the hum? Perhaps the lawyer who seems to be driving things in
Kokomo
> would be someone we should contact to help organize and coordinate
an
> effort.
>
> The experiments themselves should not be that difficult to design.
> The first step would perhaps be to determine if there is or is not
> acoustic phenomenon present when individuals hear the hum. Acoustic
> vibration is easily experimentally detected. Or perhaps it would be
> to record the brain activity present when a hum sufferer is
> experiencing the hum. The non-invasive techniques to do this have
> advanced greatly in recent years and great detail is possible - way
> beyond what is shown on an EEG. This can then be compared to what
is
> shown when known acoustic phenomenon is present.
>
> If it is determined there *is* acoustic phenomenon then the focus
> would be shifted towards determining where it is coming from.
>
> If there is no acoustic phenomenon then electromagnetic phenomenon
> could be examined. Drs Curry, Demming, and Campanella should be
able
> to put together a very comprehensive experimental plan. Is it
> possible that we can appeal to them to do so?
>
> So, how do we get organized and find someone qualified,
> interested in, and sufficiently funded for carrying out such a
series
> of experiments?
>
> Looking forward to your thoughts,
>
> Horton
>
> Halton Hills, Ontario
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>    To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/humforum/
>
>    To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> humforum-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs

>
> From: "hortonhearsahum" <hortonhearsahum@...>
> To: humforum@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: HUM_FORUM:   Experimental Plan
> Date: Mon, May 3, 2004, 5:02 PM
>
> Contacting a university representing only yourself would not carry
> nearly as much weight as having a state or federally organized body
> representing thousands do so. This is why my challenge is for someone
> to start organizing us hum sufferers. We can speculate endlessly and
> individual efforts, while worthwhile, are unlikely to bring the
> result that group action will. Alas, I, like apparently the rest of
> us, don't have the resolution to take this on.
>
> I am disappointed that Bill Curry, Angelo Campagnella, and David
> Demming have not responded yet. They are quite clearly the most
> capable to at least propose an experimental approach and even stand
> to gain since such a proposed group action may result in funding for
> their consulting businesses. On the other hand, of the three, only
> Prof Demming is a sufferer so I can understand why it is not their
> cross to bear.
>

It's spelled "Deming", with one "m".

I agree about the need for organization.  There will be no investigation
into the Hum until sufferers get organized, vocal, and loud.

Having said that, right now I have my plate full.  In addition to
moderating this forum, I work full-time and have two kids.
I also have some personal legal difficulties at the present time
that are absorbing all of my excess energy.  If these are not
solved, I will lose my position as a tenured professor.  That
will not help.

I might add that my "coming out" as a Hum hearer hasn't
helped me any at work.  It has led to people whispering behind
my back that I am a "kook", etc., and given the University
cause (in their mind) to dismiss me.

Five years ago, I tried to form a local group of hum sufferers.
About ten or twelve people showed up to the first meeting.
Zero showed up to the second.  Apathy is a big problem.

--DD

At 10:02 PM 5/3/2004 +0000, you wrote:
>I am disappointed that Bill Curry, Angelo Campagnella, and David
>Demming have not responded yet. They are quite clearly the most
>capable to at least propose an experimental approach and even stand
>to gain since such a proposed group action may result in funding for
>their consulting businesses. On the other hand, of the three, only
>Prof Demming is a sufferer so I can understand why it is not their
>cross to bear.

          I sometime feel like one of the Wright Brothers when it comes to
experimental acoustics. Namely, the ideas I have will often be at odds with
the powers that be, so I do not try to compete, nor do I seek government
support. Federal funds  (contracts) FOLLOW discoveries, they do NOT create
them. The free will of the population at large creates the discoveries.
Those that do not believe this credo are welcome to pursue the federal
grants. I will not hinder you.

          I have not met Prof Deming, but I observe that he is doing good
work in keeping this forum on-track.

          In my opinion, at this stage of knowledge, the free interchange of
ideas here will make more progress than any funded program, specifically in
this HUM situation. The reason is clear: No one is quite sure what
influences are causing the hum perceptions, nor are they sure which human
function or system is purveying it to the conscience mind. We are obliged
to pursue multiple trails (audio, E/M, etc). Grant funding rarely allows
that. To obtain grants, one must specify the result before being awarded
the grant. If one attempts to write a general grant request, the funding
entity will not give such an open grant to just anyone.. they will grant it
to their specific favored university or research lab... like the "old boys'
club". None of us here, as far as I can tell, qualify.

          The number of participants needed to seriously pursue this hunt is
perhaps a dozen qualified scientists and a hundred or so active subjects.
This hum forum may not be quite up to that strength, But I like to think
that we approximate it or at least represent a very good start. Now do the
math.. 10 scientists including over head will cost about a million dollars
a year (retail prices, no sweat equity). 100 subjects.. figure about the
same. That's US$2,000,000 per year.

          Now... just which civil servant is going to stick out his neck to
launch a two million per annum project that does NOT have guarantee from
the start by a proposal touting the Successful Result up front. Is this
begging the question? Is this a bit presumptuous? You bet it is. And that's
the point. The hum scenario is still in its formative stages. When we,
here, prove the effect beyond reasonable doubt. then, and ONLY then, will
the public monies flow to all sorts of research labs, universities, etc. etc.

          If we are all serious about the matter, we will participate to the
degree that is individually comfortable for us, knowing will eventually
find the cause, but may not share much glory and revenue in its solution. I
personally want to see it through. I feel that my reward is increased
knowledge (for me), and the good feeling of 'helping out'. But I am not
going to 'knock myself out' in the process (nor should any of us). Rather,
we should give it a good go, an help where convenient..


          Angelo Campanella

Dear Horton,
Since you've been off the forum for awhile, I wonder
if you saw the letters to the US Environmental
Protection Agency/Air Compliance and Enforcement, and
to the Indiana Dept.of Environmental Management
written Feb. 23, 2004 by US Congressman Dan Burton
asking for invesitgation into the hum re: Kokomo,
Indiana?
Both letters are posted in the forum menu under LINKS.

Burton is Chairman of the US House Subcommittee on
Human Rights and Wellness. The US EPA certainly has
the necessary resources to conduct investigations IF
PEOPLE WILL WRITE OR CALL, and PERSIST.

Also, wouldn't approaching the EPA support Prof.
Deming  who is out on a limb!

As you suggest, it's futile to endlessly speculate
(even argue?) about sources without scientific proof.
I know I can speak for many of us who hear the "hum"
that this forum is invaluable, perhaps a lifesaver.

I believe the solution to your EXPERIMENTAL PLAN =
many people (including people outside the US) making
the US EPA aware of what's happening.

The US EPA contact Congressman Burton wrote to is:
Mr. Brent Marable/Air Compliance and
Enforcement/Environmental Protection Agency/77 West
Jackson Boulevard/Chicago, Illinois 60604/USA.
I beleive there are also EPA offices in every state.

Sincerely,
Patty, northern CA


--- hortonhearsahum <hortonhearsahum@...> wrote:
>
> Contacting a university representing only yourself
> would not carry
> nearly as much weight as having a state or federally
> organized body
> representing thousands do so. This is why my
> challenge is for someone
> to start organizing us hum sufferers. We can
> speculate endlessly and
> individual efforts, while worthwhile, are unlikely
> to bring the
> result that group action will. Alas, I, like
> apparently the rest of
> us, don't have the resolution to take this on.
>
> I am disappointed that Bill Curry, Angelo
> Campagnella, and David
> Demming have not responded yet. They are quite
> clearly the most
> capable to at least propose an experimental approach
> and even stand
> to gain since such a proposed group action may
> result in funding for
> their consulting businesses. On the other hand, of
> the three, only
> Prof Demming is a sufferer so I can understand why
> it is not their
> cross to bear.
>
>
> --- In humforum@yahoogroups.com, Linda Callaway
> <lbcallaway@y...>
> wrote:
> > The DOD suggested that I contact a major
> university's Physics
> department.  That I did, only to be informed that
> they did not have
> the personnel or the monitoring equipment to
> investigate this hum.
> Please read all that you can on the HEP (High Energy
> Physics)
> research going on with DOD and DOE.  If you have not
> done so, check
> Carnicom's narratives on weather engineering via
> chemtrails.  It is
> also interesting to find that now there is some
> chatter about adverse
> effects of Cipro and quinolone classes of
> anti-biotics, such as
> Levoquin.  There are those that claim side effects
> including
> tinnitus, irregular heartbeat, joint and muscle
> pain, fatigue, etc.,
> that mimic what I believe it EMF sensitivity and a
> reaction to the
> components in the aerial spraying research.  Food
> for thought.
> >
> > hortonhearsahum <hortonhearsahum@y...> wrote:Hi
> everyone,
> >
> > I have been quite busy lately and not contributing
> much to this
> forum
> > but continue to check in once in a while. There
> has been much
> > speculation and investigation of various ideas as
> to the cause of
> the
> > hum phenomenon and it is by and large very
> interesting and
> fruitful.
> > However, to make any real progress, someone
> somewhere is going to
> > have to do a series of controlled, systematic
> investigations in
> order
> > to better understand what is actually going on.
> Since there are
> > several trained scientists participating on this
> board, I was
> hopeful
> > that one or more of them might propose something
> but that doesn't
> > seem to have happened yet so I'd like to try to
> get the ball
> rolling.
> >
> > So, how do we go about inspiring one or more
> researchers to perform
> a
> > series of experiments with the purpose of
> identifying the cause of
> > the hum? Perhaps the lawyer who seems to be
> driving things in
> Kokomo
> > would be someone we should contact to help
> organize and coordinate
> an
> > effort.
> >
> > The experiments themselves should not be that
> difficult to design.
> > The first step would perhaps be to determine if
> there is or is not
> > acoustic phenomenon present when individuals hear
> the hum. Acoustic
> > vibration is easily experimentally detected. Or
> perhaps it would be
> > to record the brain activity present when a hum
> sufferer is
> > experiencing the hum. The non-invasive techniques
> to do this have
> > advanced greatly in recent years and great detail
> is possible - way
> > beyond what is shown on an EEG. This can then be
> compared to what
> is
> > shown when known acoustic phenomenon is present.
> >
> > If it is determined there *is* acoustic phenomenon
> then the focus
> > would be shifted towards determining where it is
> coming from.
> >
> > If there is no acoustic phenomenon then
> electromagnetic phenomenon
> > could be examined. Drs Curry, Demming, and
> Campanella should be
> able
> > to put together a very comprehensive experimental
> plan. Is it
> > possible that we can appeal to them to do so?
> >
> > So, how do we get organized and find someone
> qualified,
> > interested in, and sufficiently funded for
> carrying out such a
> series
> > of experiments?
> >
> > Looking forward to your thoughts,
> >
> > Horton
> >
> > Halton Hills, Ontario
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >    To visit your group on the web, go to:
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/humforum/
> >
> >    To unsubscribe from this group, send an email
> to:
> > humforum-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >
> >    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
> Yahoo! Terms of
> Service.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
>
>






__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover

Replies from Taos and Kokomo reqested. please indetify with T or K
with suffix of C for city or R for Rural.

1. HUM? **Yes

2. THROB?**Most times not all.

3. HUM AND THROB?**Sometimes , no particular pattern.

4. THROB FREQUENCY? **Unsure

5. HUM FREQUENCY NEAREST MATCH ON PIANO COUNT KEYS FROM LOW END
(LEFT).**Unsure , I do not have access to a piano.

6. HEARD ONLY INSIDE BUILDINGS?**No I can hear it inside and outside.

6A. DOES IT DISPPEAR WHEN YOU CROSS THE THRESHOLD OR PUT YOUR HEAD
THROUGH A WINDOW?**Does not matter , can hear it just about
everywhere and at anytime.

7. HEARD OUTSID IN THE OPEN? IF SO UNDER WHAT CIRCUMSTANCES
IE NIGHT TIME QUIET, NO WIND ETC.**Mostly at night , but can be heard
through the day if I do not have a lot of distractions going etc.

8. HEARD IN STATIONARY CLOSED CAR WITH ALL SYSTEMS QUIET.**yes

9. HEARD EVERYWHERE? IE LOCAL, WIDER AREA.**Mostly just in the
vincinity of Kokomo. Have traveled out of Kokomo and did feel a
relief from the humming.

10. PLACES WHERE NOT HEARD. IE ABROAD, IF SO WHERE IS IT QUIET.
** I have been travelling with my husband and have felt that most
areas south of where we are , are a lot better where the hum is
concerned. IE: Kentucky , Tennessee , etc.

11. HEARD AT SEA? IE UNDER QUIET CONDITIONS, ON DECK , INSIDE CLOSED
CABIN.**N/A

12. HEARD IN THE AIR? IE QUIET CONDITIONS, BALLOON RIDE, GLIDER IN
STALL CONDITION.**N/A

13. DID YOU BECOME AWARE OF THE SOUND YOURSELF? WHAT WERE THE
CONDITIONS AT THE TIME?**Yes I became aware about 6 months or so
before others were publicly complaining of it. I have heard it since
April of 1999. Typical conditions this time 5 years ago , spring was
new and same area lived in then as is now.

14. DID SOMEONE ELSE MAKE YOU AWARE BY EXPLAINING THE LISTENING
PROCESS? UNDER WHAT CONDITIONS?**No I seem to be the only one that
can "hear" it here. I mean there are others that live in the
neighborhood that has heard it , but me personally from our home and
my family.

15. HAVE YOU MADE ANY OTHER PERSON AWARE?**Yes , physician ,
husband , sisters , etc.
15B.IF SO ARE FAMILY MEMBERS?
15C. RELATED?**Sisters , mother , husband etc.
15D. OTHERS?**Doctor

16. DO YOU FIND THAT OTHER NOISES TONES INTERFERE WITH THE NOISE?
IE BEAT WITH IT?**Never paid that much attention I guess. I just know
that it is annoying and distracting.

17. PHYSICAL EFFECTS.**Menstrual iregularities , headaches ,
insomnia , etc.
17A. UPSET YOUR BALANCE? IE WALK INTO DOOR JAMS.**Yes and lose
balance quite frequently and have even fell a few times too.
17B. FEEL IT OR HEAR IT.**Most times just hear it , a few occasions
when I am completely exhausted I can feel it.
17C. EFFECT YOUR SLEEP? IE REDUCE IT, CAN ONLY SLEEP PROPERLY WHEN
EXHAUSTED, FIND YOUSELF LIVING BETWEEN 2 LEVELS OF EXHAUSTION
IE SLEEP LEVEL WAKE UP LEVEL.** Yes it has affected my sleeping
tremendously.

18. DOES THE NOISE EFFECT YOUR HEARING?**Yes , constant ringing
sensations , humming as well as sometimes I cannot hear very well. As
if I am in a tunnel.
18A.FEEL LIKE YOUR EARS ARE STUFFED WITH COTTON WOOL, NEED TO POKE
EAR TO STOP IRRITATION.**Yes all the time !!
18B.DO YOU HEAR A HIGH PITCHED WHISTLE TYPE OF NOISE THAT SWITCHES ON
OR OFF?**Occasionally yes.
18C.DO YOU FEEL SUDDEN SEEMING PRESSURE WAVE TYPE CHANGES FOLLOWED BY
A HIGH PITCHED WHISTLE OR SOMETHING SIMILAR.
18D. IF IT DOES SWITCH IS IT RELATED TO VARIATION IN THE NOISE?**Not
really sure about this part of the question.

19. DO HEAR AN IRREGULAR POPPING?**Frequently yes.

20. DOES THE NOISE DISAPPEAR AFTER EXPOSURE TO LOUD NOISE SOURCES OR
AFTER A NOISY JOURNEY? **No.
21. DOES ALCOHOL HELP YOU SLEEP?**No do not drink alcohol.Have had to
resort to taking sleep medication though.
22. WHAT WAS THE DATE WHEN YOU FIRST HEARD IT?**April 1999
23. ANY OTHER COMENTS?**When will it go away ? Why do some people
hear and feel it ? And others don't ? As well as why are communities
not more willing to listen to complaints ?

Energy and other domestic supplies.
24. what are the energy supplies in your area?**Gas , electric.
24a. Electricity? transformers nearby?**Pretty close within about a
mile or so.
24b. Electricity windfarms? If so, how far to windfarm?**N/A
24c. Natural Gas?
Piped? local supply?**A little of both.
distant supply by high pressure pipeline? if so, what pressure where
from? Pipe and pressure may be found on markers at highway cross
points.

25. Water supplies.
25a. local gravity fed reservoir? local storage towers?
25b. subsurface extraction? local store towers?
25c. distant pumped supply? local store towers?
25d. processed river extraction? local storage towers?
**I live about 4 miles from a reservoir , a few blocks from our waste
plant , the water plant is about a mile or two away , do not live
near a water tower , and do not live real close by any body of water.
I do live about 4 blocks from a creek though. Nothing really
electrical I would think with that anyhow..

Stacey
Kokomo Indiana

Because of its apparent limitation to industrialised or developed nations it must be present and measurable.

It there fore seems we must be looking for something that is camouflaged within the general acoustic background ( I favour the acoustic origin theory, it is heard hence it is more likely acoustic than a  induced electromagnetic origin although of course the majority once thought the earth flat).

So if acoustic it sits in the enviroment, unrecognised for what it is.

IO 226 sets us to believe the threshold of hearing is fixed (well more or less since it evolved fromtests dominated by young males) but this was a threshold based on pure tones.

What then, if thresholds for broader band 'noise' did not obey the same limitation.

Additionally, also what if some other factor figured in the perception of some of the population and we know it does as some persons have been made aware of the 'hum' byrealtives or friends.

it might be they are not so friendly now they have been made aware!

In any event it could be that within the measurements already made lies the answer.

Read this interesting article about Ionospheric Heaters, an overview
at following link, and keep in mind that tIonospheric Heaters are
possible Hum sources;

www.physics.irfu.se/Publications/Carozzi_PhD.pdf

For the open minded minds that wish to turn every rocks, please
explore following link;

http://www.world-action.co.uk/gwen.html

At 09:25 PM 5/6/2004 +0000, you wrote:
>Read this interesting article about Ionospheric Heaters, an overview
>at following link, and keep in mind that tIonospheric Heaters are
>possible Hum sources;
>
>www.physics.irfu.se/Publications/Carozzi_PhD.pdf

          I read it, and although Carozzi discusses the nonlinear effects
that may be excited in the ionosphere, he makes no mention or speculation
about generation of sound waves. To me, it is clear that qualitatively,
sound waves are possible, but the loudness of them is highly in question.
For one thing, the density of the air where they are generated is probably
less than 1/1000th of that at the surface, so that degree of attenuation
will occur at the outset as said sound waves progress downward to the
surface. . Real numbers need to be crunched before the loudness can even be
estimated... At that, be aware that the sound frequencies heard will be
twice that of the frequency of AM modulation (the most likely mode). e.g. a
1,000Hz modulation of the emitted radio wave will result in a 2,000Hz sound.


                  Angelo Campanella

At 09:54 PM 5/6/2004 +0000, you wrote:
>For the open minded minds that wish to turn every rocks, please
>explore following link;
>
>http://www.world-action.co.uk/gwen.html

          I wonder whether that dude "hears voices" as well!


                  Angelo Campanella

Response from Denver (Arvada) Colorado

1. HUM?  Yes.
2. THROB?  Sometimes.
3. HUM AND THROB?  Sometimes.
4. THROB FREQUENCY?
5. HUM FREQUENCY NEAREST MATCH ON PIANO COUNT KEYS FROM LOW END
(LEFT).  Don't know.

6. HEARD ONLY INSIDE BUILDINGS?  No.
6A. DOES IT DISAPPEAR WHEN YOU CROSS THE THRESHOLD OR PUT YOUR HEAD
THROUGH A WINDOW (CROSS THE THRESHOLD)?  No.
7. HEARD OUTSIDE IN THE OPEN? IF SO UNDER WHAT CIRCUMSTANCES
IE NIGHT TIME QUIET, NO WIND ETC.  I can hear it outside day or
night, regardless of time, or wind, etc.
8. HEARD IN STATIONARY CLOSED CAR WITH ALL SYSTEMS QUIET.  Yes.
9. HEARD EVERYWHERE? IE LOCAL, WIDER AREA.  I can't hear it at my
local grocer or my place of employment - five miles away.
10. PLACES WHERE NOT HEARD. IE ABROAD, IF SO WHERE IS IT QUIET.
Recently visited Chicago Illinois for four days, did not hear/feel it
there.
11. HEARD AT SEA? IE UNDER QUIET CONDITIONS, ON DECK , INSIDE CLOSED
CABIN.  Don't know.
12. HEARD IN THE AIR? IE QUIET CONDITIONS, BALLOON RIDE, GLIDER IN
STALL CONDITION.   Don't know.

13. DID YOU BECOME AWARE OF THE SOUND YOURSELF? WHAT WERE THE
CONDITIONS AT THE TIME?  The hum just turned on one night @ 10:30 PM,
June 2003.
14. DID SOMEONE ELSE MAKE YOU AWARE BY EXPLAINING THE LISTENING
PROCESS? No.

15. HAVE YOU MADE ANY OTHER PERSON AWARE?  I've only asked a few co-
workers and they don't hear it.  I do not want anyone else to suffer
because I pointed the hum out to them.
15B.IF SO ARE FAMILY MEMBERS?  No
15C. RELATED?  No

16. DO YOU FIND THAT OTHER NOISES TONES INTERFERE WITH THE NOISE?  I
have found that the more noise I use to cover it up, the louder the
hum becomes.
IE BEAT WITH IT?

17. PHYSICAL EFFECTS.  Lack of restful sleep.
17A. UPSET YOUR BALANCE? IE WALK INTO DOOR JAMS.  No.
17B. FEEL IT OR HEAR IT.  I feel and hear it.  I can feel the
vibrations on my cement basement wall.  Although the higher up I am
(in my house) the less I hear the hum.
17C. EFFECT YOUR SLEEP? IE REDUCE IT, CAN ONLY SLEEP PROPERLY WHEN
EXHAUSTED, FIND YOUSELF LIVING BETWEEN 2 LEVELS OF EXHAUSTION
IE SLEEP LEVEL WAKE UP LEVEL.  See 17 above.

18. DOES THE NOISE EFFECT YOUR HEARING?  No.
18A.FEEL LIKE YOUR EARS ARE STUFFED WITH COTTON WOOL, NEED TO POKE
EAR TO STOP IRRITATION.  No.
18B.DO YOU HEAR A HIGH PITCHED WHISTLE TYPE OF NOISE THAT SWITCHES ON
OR OFF?  I hear what I think sounds like a sonar-type of ping when
the hum begins, kind of like a signal for something to turn on - then
I hear the hum.
18C.DO YOU FEEL SUDDEN SEEMING PRESSURE WAVE TYPE CHANGES FOLLOWED BY
A HIGH PITCHED WHISTLE OR SOMETHING SIMILAR.  I have felt a pressure
change associated with the boom.  This sensation or pressure change
happens very quickly, then subsides just as fast.
18D. IF IT DOES SWITCH IS IT RELATED TO VARIATION IN THE NOISE?
19. DO HEAR AN IRREGULAR POPPING? No.  I have heard a boom, which
precedes the pressure change.
20. DOES THE NOISE DISAPPEAR AFTER EXPOSURE TO LOUD NOISE SOURCES OR
AFTER A NOISY JOURNEY?  No.
21. DOES ALCOHOL HELP YOU SLEEP?  N/A
22. WHAT WAS THE DATE WHEN YOU FIRST HEARD IT?  June 2003
23. ANY OTHER COMMENTS?

I spent weeks trying to figure out where this "hum" comes from.  When
I first heard it I thought it was a truck idling outside or somebody
practicing bass somewhere.  Of course, after walking around my block
a couple times (in the middle of the night), I determined it wasn't
either of those.  I happened upon this forum after a co-worker told
me he had heard about the Kokomo hum.  I do notice that the hum gets
louder around 10:30 PM and 3:00 AM - the weekends are the worst - the
hum is very loud Friday, Saturday and Sunday.  I do hope that someone
finds out what is creating this noise.

Margaret - Arvada Colorado

Greetings,

I thought I posted something of an experience the other day but I do
not see it posted for the 5 th.

I was digging a trench at work where there was a lot of effort put in
to digging out mud and roots.

I could hear the Hum, while in the drainage area I was working in.

Every time I would strain real hard to lift a shovel of muck out of
the trench, the quality and intensity of the Hum exhibited a definite
increase.

Actually, I have done a lot of heavy lifitng and straining and do not
remember having audible sounds increase in that manner.

This made me wonder if the amplification came from a change in the
circulatory system or the muscles or nerves.

I am going to confer with my physician to ask if she thinks there
should be an increase in an audible sound under strain.

Buzzn8 in Eastern Montana

Angelo, At my place, the 'sound' I experience doesn't
vary or fluctate. It is either low, medium, or intense
for long periods at a time. If ionosphric heaters are
producing 'sound' in some way, wouldn't the 'sound'
fluctuate and vary since waves generated into the
ionosphere would be "skipping" around the planet at
different locations?

Radar seems more likely to produce a constant effect
at targeted areas.

Could you explain what is meant by "..AM modulation
(the most likely mode)"?
Thank you,
Patty, northern CA
PS: For the record, I don't think that mind control
experiments are impossible. Anything is possible.

--- Angelo Campanella <a.campanella@...> wrote:
> At 09:25 PM 5/6/2004 +0000, you wrote:
> >Read this interesting article about Ionospheric
> Heaters, an overview
> >at following link, and keep in mind that
> tIonospheric Heaters are
> >possible Hum sources;
> >
> >www.physics.irfu.se/Publications/Carozzi_PhD.pdf
>
>          I read it, and although Carozzi discusses
> the nonlinear effects
> that may be excited in the ionosphere, he makes no
> mention or speculation
> about generation of sound waves. To me, it is clear
> that qualitatively,
> sound waves are possible, but the loudness of them
> is highly in question.
> For one thing, the density of the air where they are
> generated is probably
> less than 1/1000th of that at the surface, so that
> degree of attenuation
> will occur at the outset as said sound waves
> progress downward to the
> surface. . Real numbers need to be crunched before
> the loudness can even be
> estimated... At that, be aware that the sound
> frequencies heard will be
> twice that of the frequency of AM modulation (the
> most likely mode). e.g. a
> 1,000Hz modulation of the emitted radio wave will
> result in a 2,000Hz sound.
>
>
>                  Angelo Campanella
>
>
>





__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover

Prof. Deming, your courage in running this forum is commendable - you
are doing your part and I thank you for it.

It seems that, at least in my case, the existence of this forum has
actually increased the apathy I have for actually doing something
about the hum. The fact that so many others experience it and have so
for years without any seeming physical side effects provides some
comfort to me. And I am less likely to take action because I have
rationalized things in the following way:

If the hum is a natural phenomenon then it is of interest to know
it's cause but the fear and anxiety that it creates in the sufferer
should not be over-exaggerated but more on a par with fears of
overexposure to the sun, etc.

If the hum is due to DoD activity then to a certain extent we can
assume that they are not going to expose us to lethal side effects -
I know they can get carried away at times and there are many examples
of the populace being harmed by their overexuberance but they won't
continue indefinitely with something that is harmful to people once
they understand it. They do supposedly have our long term best
interests in mind...

And if the hum is due to activity by a foreign country, then I think
it is fair to assume that the DoD is looking into it considering the
press coverage its been getting in Kokomo, etc. They have
demonstrated in the past that they are quite open-minded in looking
at "wild and crazy" ideas.

I think the most sinister case would be if it was due to activity by
a commercial enterprise such as oil company exploration - they would
be less likely to worry about non-immediately lethal side effects on
people. By the time people can figure out what the cause of the hum
is, they will be finished, and as long as there are no immediate,
broad-based health effects, who will ever know? A statistical rise in
cancer...fibromyalgia...loss of sleep...just make sure your family is
not in the area being studied at the moment.

It has also occurred to me that this forum could be a way of
monitoring the side effects on the population of whatever the cause
of the hum is on the population by the parties responsible. And/or to
conduct a campaign of disinformation to put potential researchers off
track. But perhaps my hum-induced, sleep-deprived, overactive
imagination is getting carried away.

In any case, this forum does provide a valuable service to hum
sufferers - at least we know we are not alone.

--- In humforum@yahoogroups.com, "David Deming" <profdeming@e...>
wrote:
> I agree about the need for organization.  There will be no
investigation
> into the Hum until sufferers get organized, vocal, and loud.
>
> Having said that, right now I have my plate full.  In addition to
> moderating this forum, I work full-time and have two kids.
> I also have some personal legal difficulties at the present time
> that are absorbing all of my excess energy.  If these are not
> solved, I will lose my position as a tenured professor.  That
> will not help.
>
> I might add that my "coming out" as a Hum hearer hasn't
> helped me any at work.  It has led to people whispering behind
> my back that I am a "kook", etc., and given the University
> cause (in their mind) to dismiss me.
>
> Five years ago, I tried to form a local group of hum sufferers.
> About ten or twelve people showed up to the first meeting.
> Zero showed up to the second.  Apathy is a big problem.

I wish where I lived that The Hum would stop sometimes as expressed
in past posts by other members but here in the UK where I am it is
24/7. It drives me bananas if I allow it it too. It began for me the
week the Gulf War 2 began on the 18th march 2003. I sometimes wonder
if there was some connection there due to having British Aerospace
near or it could be just due to air traffic increasing and something
to do with radar or it could just be the nearby Tesco Supermarket and
their refridgeration storage or the local hospitals extractor fans
boy who knows and really no-one in any authority cares as long as you
keep paying your taxes ho hum! Fortunately I have slowly become a
little more tolerant of it not allowing it to get under my skin but
there are some nights when one wishes you could just shout at someone
to switch the dashed thing off! Oh well I will keep on dreaming lol.
Thanks for listening I just need to gripe tonight due to not being
able to settle to sleep I wonder why?