See other Science/Tech Articles
Title: Coming Soon -- Microwave Gun That Can Destroy Your Car From 600 Feet Away
Source:
mercola.com
URL Source: http://articles.mercola.com/sites/a ... ur-car-from-600-feet-away.aspx
Published: Dec 29, 2007
Author: Dr. Mercola
Post Date: 2007-12-29 11:44:37 by richard9151
Ping List: *Agriculture-Environment* Subscribe to *Agriculture-Environment*
Keywords: None
Views: 304
Comments: 5
A Pasadena, California company has created a device that will destroy a car’s electrical system and stop it dead in its tracks. Just one pulse from this beam disables cars up to 50 feet away. How does it work? One beam pulsed in a burst lasting just 50 nanoseconds disrupts your vehicle's electrical system. The radiation can overload wires, or damage or upset your car's central microprocessor. Their prototype is 5 feet long, 3 feet wide, 1 foot thick, and weighs just under 200 pounds. With proper funding, it may be possible to create a device weighing only 50 pounds that works from 600 feet away. It operates on the same general principle as a microwave oven, but at a 300 megahertz frequency, rather than your standard microwave oven, which operates at about 2.5 gigahertz. It is said to be non-harmful to humans. Sources: Slashgear December 4, 2007 Discovery News November 29, 2007 Eureka Aerospace HPEMS Technology Description Dr. Mercola's comments; In many ways this is not too different from the Taser system used by many law enforcement agencies and being marketed as “harmless” yet it has killed hundreds of people, and who knows how many tens of thousands of others have been permanently harmed by this EMR insult. The lines between reality and science fiction are becoming ever more blurred, with all sorts of mind-blowing new high-tech weapons slated for use both within the United States’ borders, and for international defense. Just one other example is the Active Denial System (ADS), which uses a 95 GHz wave to produce an “intolerable heat sensation” that repels the targeted individual away from the beam. The increasing use of electromagnetic weapons is a double-edged sword; on the one hand they may be less lethal than conventional weapons, but the long-term ramifications of their use are completely unknown. However, with what we already know about the influence microwaves has on the human biology, it is not far-fetched to imagine the price we’ll pay for their use could be higher than expected. As with the ADS system, unexpected things can, and do happen. Ask the service member who got second degree burns when participating in an ADS demonstration at the Moody Air Force Base in GA whether he believes the system to be completely harmless to humans… According to Eureka Aerospace’s technology description, the operational range of frequencies will be tunable between 350 to 1350 MHz. They are also planning to transition the technology into 5-km perimeter protection applications, effectively stopping all traffic where the device is employed, such as for highway blockades and setting up safety perimeters around oil rigs. The main staple argument by those who believe that microwave radiation (such as cell phones, for example, operating in the 800 to 2,200 MHz frequency), is completely harmless, is that these lower frequencies do not emit enough energy to break chemical bonds (non-ionizing radiation). However, there’s plenty of evidence to contradict the belief that there’s no damage unless you break chemical bonds. For example, extremely low frequencies (ELF’s emitted from appliances and power lines) are known to be carcinogenic. Used correctly, these weapons could act as an effective tool of protection for police officers and civilians when faced with trying to control situations involving high-speed car chases, for example. My only concern is that these weapons could accidentally fall into the wrong hands and end up being used for all the wrong reasons. Related Articles: Future Shock The Proven Dangers of Microwaves Are EMF’s Hazardous to Our Health?
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 5.
#1. To: richard9151 (#0)
Thor Shield Anti-Taser/Anti-Microwave Thor Shield is a fabric. G2 Consulting, which makes the new anti-Taser tech fabric, claims that Thor Shield "provides the ultimate defense available today for non-lethal [a.k.a. less-lethal) energy weapons", i.e. any kind of stun gun or Taser-like weapon that relies on electricity to incapacitate. G2 states that Thor Shield Energy Weapon Protection Fabric is 100% effective against all non-lethal/less-lethal energy weapons currently in use. There are two versions of it: Heavy Protection and Light Protection.
In essence, what this means is that, once again, what the cops use will only work against innocents. Those who are planning something, well, the cops know the bad guys know, so it is, obviously, better to play with those who are less trouble/dangerous.
It looks like this is available commercially.
I would have bet on that. After all, NOTHING interferes with commerce within the United States!!
There are no replies to Comment # 5. End Trace Mode for Comment # 5.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestDefenseReview has written articles about the Taser X26 less lethal weapon system and its proprietary Video Digital Power Power Magazine, which records video from any shooting incident in which a Taser X26 is involved. But, how does one defend against the X26's potent Shaped Pulse Technology? Well, we've got two words for ya': Thor Shield (TS) (a.k.a. ThorShield).
both less-lethal energy weapons and less-lethal directed energy weapons (DEW) that use microwaves. This is a significant thing, especially if the fabric can protect the wearer from millimeter-wave weapons tech like Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) Directed Energy Directorate's rather frightening Active Denial Technology (ADT). ADT is particularly nasty.
#2. To: All (#1)
(Edited)
#3. To: robin (#2)
Heavy Protection and Light Protection.
#4. To: richard9151 (#3)
#5. To: robin (#4)
It looks like this is available commercially.
Replies to Comment # 5.