* Click on any lightning photo to ENLARGE *
Positive Lightning Strike:
“Positive lightning makes up less than 5% of all strikes. However, despite a significantly lower rate of occurrence, positive lightning is particularly dangerous for several reasons. Since it originates in the upper levels of a storm, the amount of air it must burn through to reach the ground usually much greater. Therefore, its electric field typically is much stronger than a negative strike. Its flash duration is longer, and its peak charge and potential can be ten times greater than a negative strike; as much as 300,000 amperes and one billion volts!
Some positive strikes can occur within the parent thunderstorm and strike the ground beneath the cloud. However, many positive strikes occur near the edge of the cloud or strike MORE THAN 10 MILES AWAY, where you may not perceive any risk nor hear any thunder.”
(Source: “The Positive and Negative Side of Lightning” – National Weather Service @ http://www.srh.noaa.gov
Look at the photos above and below which are being taken with increasing regularity around the world. These are real photos capturing Positive Lightning Strikes (PLS) within various contexts across the planet. Do you notice the extraordinary power and intensity of the lightning? These are most often Positive Lightning Strikes, which are substantially larger, more powerful, and more destructive than the regular lightning that comes with a normal thunderstorm.
“Positive lightning makes up less than 5 % of all lightning. It occurs when the stepped leader forms at the positively charged cloud tops, with the consequence that a negatively charged streamer issues from the ground. The overall effect is a discharge of positive charges to the ground. Research carried out after the discovery of positive lightning in the 1970s showed that positive lightning bolts are typically six to ten times more powerful than negative bolts, last around ten times longer, and can strike several kilometers or miles distant from the clouds. During a positive lightning strike, huge quantities of ELF and VLF radio waves are generated.
As a result of their power, positive lightning strikes are considerably more dangerous. At the present time, aircraft are not designed to withstand such strikes, since their existence was unknown at the time standards were set, and the dangers unappreciated until the destruction of a glider in 1999.
Positive lightning is also now believed to have been responsible for the 1963 in-flight explosion and subsequent crash of Pan Am Flight 214, a Boeing 707. Subsequently, aircraft operating in U.S. airspace have been required to have lightning discharge wicks to reduce the chances of a similar occurrence.
Positive lightning has also been shown to trigger the occurrence of upper atmospheric lightning. It tends to occur more frequently in winter storms and at the end of a thunderstorm.”
Clearly, there are major changes occurring in the atmosphere and elsewhere which are super-charging positive lightning strikes to a degree never seen before. There are credible theories which have postulated that an increase in cosmic ray activity is responsible for the uptick in this atmospheric phenomena. Perhaps it’s time for the scientific community to verify these theories with data they can easily acquire.
The following excerpt come from the Science for People website:
“But cosmic rays come from outer space. Can it be that lightning is actually triggered by exotic cosmic events, perhaps billions of light-years away? Dwyer realized that his conclusions gave newfound credibility to a theory advanced in the 1990s by Alexander Gurevich of the Lebedev Institute in Moscow. Gurevich proposed that cosmic rays could initiate a kind of electron chain reaction. When a cosmic ray hits an atom in the air, it can knock off an electron which flies off at high speed. It can hit another electron, which can hit another, etc., analogous to billiard balls on a pool table. But just like billiard balls, the electrons ultimately lose their energy (typically to heat) and then everything settles down again.”
Even Scientific American has weighed in on this matter when they published Do cosmic rays cause lightning? in their January 24th edition in 2008.
“A mechanism proposed by Russian physicist Alex V. Gurevich of the Lebedev Physical Institute and his collaborators suggest that the movement of large showers of energetic particles produced by high-energy cosmic rays—which originate from exploding stars halfway across the galaxy—might provide a conductive path that initiates lightning. There are indeed types of particle detectors called spark chambers that exploit this principle. In a spark chamber, a very large voltage is applied across a small gap filled with a gas. The resulting electric field is large enough to cause the gap to break down (or spark), so long as there exist some free electrons to get the whole process going. Think of loose rocks ready to fall down the side of a mountain. In order to get an avalanche going, all that is needed is the first moving rock. Similarly, when a charged particle (the first rock) passes through the gap, the ionization it leaves behind will cause a spark, which more or less follows the particle’s path. For these kinds of detectors, the location of the spark can be used to identify when and where the charged particle went through.”
Here’s an excerpt from an article entitled Cosmic rays explode tree at American Center for Physics? which appeared at PhysicsBuzz.physicscentral.com.
“Runaway breakdown occurs when the drag force that electrons experience moving through air is less than the electric force acting upon them. In such cases, the electrons will “run away,” gaining very large amounts of energy. As the runaway electrons collide with air molecules, they generate other runaway electrons plus x-rays and gamma rays, resulting in an avalanche of high-energy particles. Instead of rocks in a landslide, think of the runaway electrons as shrapnel tearing up a path through the storm cloud. According to the Gurevich model, this conductive path is what causes lightning.
Runaway breakdown can create large amounts of high-energy electrons, as well as x-rays and gamma rays. Interestingly, we know that runaway breakdown works for the low electric fields already seen inside thunderstorms. We also know that it does sometimes happen right before lightning, because we can see big bursts of x-rays and gamma rays shooting out of thunderstorms. In fact, these gamma rays are so energetic and so bright that they have been observed from outer space, 600 kilometers (373 miles) above Earth’s surface.”
There is no denying that Positive Lightning Strikes have been increasing in frequency and intensity for many years now. Since cosmic ray activity has been likewise increasing, we ask the physics research establishment to reveal whatever data that has been accumulated in this regard. In order for the residents of Planet Earth to make more informed decisions about how to better respond during these times of greater atmospheric electrical activity and positive lightning strikes.
Is HAARP and the continuous and artificial charging of the ionosphere creating a much more conducive environment for Positive Lightning Strikes to occur everywhere across the planet? Also, by sending HAARP frequencies through chemtrails for purposes of conducting atmospheric sonar experiments? If so, it is time for HAARP to be closed down … forever. Perhaps some PLSs will conveniently take down a chunk of the HAARP network in the near future?!
Cosmic Convergence Research Group
Submitted: May 28, 2012
 Excerpt from “Lightning” – electricalfun.com
 Excerpt from “Electrifying News: A long-held theory comes to a shocking end.” – ScienceforPeople.com (December 16, 2003)
 Excerpt from “Do cosmic rays cause lightning?” – ScientificAmerican.com (January 24, 2008)
 Excerpt from “Cosmic rays explode tree at American Center for Physics?” – PhysicsBuzz.physicscentral.com (Monday, July 19, 2010)
© 2012 Cosmic Convergence 2012
Permission is granted to post this essay as long as it is linked back to the following url: http://cosmicconvergence.org/?p=1109