View Single Post
Mar21-09, 01:59 AM
P: 450
Quote Quote by russ_watters View Post
So are you interested in HAARP or are you interested in that patent? They don't have anything to do with each other...
The USPTO endeavours to filter out crackpottery, but by their nature, patents don't automatically require real inventions, just unique ideas. This is one that slipped through the cracks.
As I understand it, it was one of the inventions that led to the H.A.A.R.P., and the invention is the very technology used by H.A.A.R.P. to carry out their research. I already stated I shouldn't have said H.A.A.R.P. if I would rather discuss the technology only. I don't see how in any way this patent is crackpotery. using terms like significant don't imply crackpot. They probably mean significant as in enough to fulfill a purpose as opposed to a useless amount.

"Bernard J. Eastlund (1938 – December 12, 2007) was a physicist who received his B.S. in physics from MIT and a his Ph.D. in physics from Columbia University. He received a Special Achievement Certificate from the U. S. Atomic Energy Commission in 1970 for co-invention of the "Fusion Torch."
Eastlund was the founder of Eastlund Scientific Enterprises Corporation (ESEC), a small company in Houston, Texas that provided scientific, engineering and technical services.
His hobby was astrophysics. Recently he has co-authored two papers regarding pulsars in the Astrophysical Journal and has presented a paper on Gamma Bursters.
In addition, Eastlund is one of the patent holders (US Patent #4,686,605) that led to the development of the High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program HAARP..."

I don't want to get into the issue of what H.A.A.R.P. is doing because there is so much B.S. But the guy who invented the apparatus isn't a crackpot.