Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.
Ten Biggest World Conspiracy Theories
Comments
-
i dont understand paddyirishmans statement, he says he is openminded enough or has looked enough to say he believes but is a skeptic ?
i dont get this , a skeptic who believes - is this a new form of life ?
Or, you know, someone who reaches conclusions based on their observations and logic. Like a skeptic.0 -
Not really. There are millions of people who believe in UFOs all over the world and they do no harm to the NWO.did you watch the video ?
i didnt say i believed it , but i would be inclined to
im saying the facts are there , join the dots - its speculation , but it has some legs .
ie ,
maybe its time the mexicans shut up about ET'S or face the conseqeunces ?
I don't think the Mexican government are vocal on the existence of aliens but I might be wrong on that.
It seems pretty far fetched that they would release a virus just to stem belief in aliens. Especially when there is no evidence that the virus is artificial.
There is the little problem of the vast distance between the stars and vast amount of time it takes to cross it. And the fact that the Earth doesn't particularly stand out in the universe.in terms of god and ET'S , i stated from a science and logic view point
its far more likely and plausible that ET's are here or exist then GOD is here or exists
they are a physical , technological life form as we are.
Alien life probably. Alien visitation unlikely.
Who said I believe in God? Are you just lumping in everyone into the same category.GOD is .... you tell me ? what is god ?
there is no proof god exists or can exist
there is proof ET'S CAN exist , since we exist
Have you considered the possibility that the evidence does not stand up to scrutiny and skeptical inquiry?and if you are willing to look at the present evidence in an openminded fashion , they DO exist .
i dont understand paddyirishmans statement, he says he is openminded enough or has looked enough to say he believes but is a skeptic ?
i dont get this , a skeptic who believes - is this a new form of life ?0 -
-
There is the little problem of the vast distance between the stars and vast amount of time it takes to cross it. And the fact that the Earth doesn't particularly stand out in the universe.
Alien life probably. Alien visitation unlikely.
Dr. Michio Kaku believes in different civilisation types (or levels), I think it's an idea of Carl Sagan's. BVut basically, the belief in theoretical physics and string theory at the moment is that while Einstein's relativity cannot be broken, it would still be possible to bend space/time in order to travel great distances. According to Kaku, the power required would be huge, but a type 2 or type 3 civilisation should have advanced to the level of being able to accomplish this.
He has a new book out, physics of the impossible or something. Must pick it up.
Of course, the flying disc phenomenon could be related to the nazi bell experiment, there's some compelling arguments for that.0 -
If I understand you, what you're saying is that without moon-dust from a verifiable third-party who has no vested interest, its impossible to disprove the claim that boots won't leave footprints?
If that's correct, then I have only one question...
In a manner of speaking yes. The substance given to mythbusters from NASA was not moondust. And NASA should not have taken part in the programme if the programme is to be held as a definitive answer to the conspiracy theories. Would you not agree?What basis is this claim established on, that it needs to be disproved? Did the people making it have access to moon-dust from such a verifiably-independant third party, and test their theory in a low-gravity, vacuum?
This is based on the fact that on normal dust or sand without the presence of moisture, perfect footprints with depth are impossible to imprint. Would you not agree?0 -
Advertisement
-
Lads, if the CTers gave us evidence of a CT where the tests were done in the labs of the people at centre of conspiracy and with material supplied by said people we'd give them hell for it.0
-
thecommander wrote: »Lads, if the CTers gave us evidence of a CT where the tests were done in the labs of the people at centre of conspiracy and with material supplied by said people we'd give them hell for it.
Well maybe but generally I'd be happy that some proper experimentation was done. The people who claim that NASA didn't go to the moon never do these experiments but jump all over any angle when someone else does. So who do we trust, people who are willing to do the experiments even if there is a possibility for contamination or people who just say it didn't happen.0 -
And type 2 to type 3 civilisations would be ridiculously far advanced and could take thousand of years to develop if at all.Dr. Michio Kaku believes in different civilisation types (or levels), I think it's an idea of Carl Sagan's. BVut basically, the belief in theoretical physics and string theory at the moment is that while Einstein's relativity cannot be broken, it would still be possible to bend space/time in order to travel great distances. According to Kaku, the power required would be huge, but a type 2 or type 3 civilisation should have advanced to the level of being able to accomplish this.
He has a new book out, physics of the impossible or something. Must pick it up.
Of course, the flying disc phenomenon could be related to the nazi bell experiment, there's some compelling arguments for that.
And still traveling between star would be a huge investment of resources, even with fast than light propulsion.
And even FTL has it's problems. At lightspeed it'll still take you 4 years to get to the nearest star. And current models for theoretical warp drive still require you to travel at sublight speed to lay out the warped space ahead of time.
So aliens traveling to Earth is pretty unlikely.
Wasn't that the myth they where trying to bust?This is based on the fact that on normal dust or sand without the presence of moisture, perfect footprints with depth are impossible to imprint. Would you not agree?
And didn't they show it was indeed possible?0 -
faster than light IS possible , in fact you dont really "move" at all , you bend space until the point you are at and the point you want to be at
co exist -
I know you want to see proof , sorry dont have any - i can only pass on what ive learned in years of studying it .
and i do believe most of stands up to scrutiny to the openminded , who do not believe we are the masters of science.
I do however accept the statements recorded by the disclosure project under stephen greer and the exppolitick projects of the many ex air force , secret service , etc etc people who worked on this stuff
and are now sick of carrying the secrets - and are willing to testify in congress about what they have seen and done.
but alot of these ET'S apparently do not come from other stars , they actually come form other universes - parrallel ones.
universes that exist in the same place as ours but shifted into another dimension .
the reason earth is such a hot bed of activity ( over 50 difffering races visiting apparently ) , begins just before Roswell .
The explosion of the nuclear tests and the bombings of japan didnt just affect earth , they basically "exploded" in dimensions other than ours - parallel universes -.
The bombs had far reaching affects , affecting ET's in these PU'S - it was basically a big sign , to which thay had to repond and look at " what the fcuk are these nutjob apes up to "
and so began the visits of the modern day ET'S
The proliferation of higher power atom and later super massive hydrogen tests created shockwaves that rang around the universi ( for want of a better word ) .
it seems the forced crude manipulation of matter like this works on an interdimensional level .
roswell occured due to the ships that arrived in great numbers to check us out , not being able to cope with high power ground radar initially
some of the ships crashed and were recovered , along with some dead and some alive ET'S
apparently they fixed this , and stopped crashing , until we decided to start shooting them down instead- which has happend a few times.
and most of our greatest scientific achievements have been back engineered from crashed ET technology .0 -
faster than light IS possible , in fact you dont really "move" at all , you bend space until the point you are at and the point you want to be at
co exist -
I know you want to see proof , sorry dont have any - i can only pass on what ive learned in years of studying it .
and i do believe most of stands up to scrutiny to the openminded , who do not believe we are the masters of science.
I do however accept the statements recorded by the disclosure project under stephen greer and the exppolitick projects of the many ex air force , secret service , etc etc people who worked on this stuff
and are now sick of carrying the secrets - and are willing to testify in congress about what they have seen and done.
but alot of these ET'S apparently do not come from other stars , they actually come form other universes - parrallel ones.
universes that exist in the same place as ours but shifted into another dimension .
the reason earth is such a hot bed of activity ( over 50 difffering races visiting apparently ) , begins just before Roswell .
The explosion of the nuclear tests and the bombings of japan didnt just affect earth , they basically "exploded" in dimensions other than ours - parallel universes -.
The bombs had far reaching affects , affecting ET's in these PU'S - it was basically a big sign , to which thay had to repond and look at " what the fcuk are these nutjob apes up to "
and so began the visits of the modern day ET'S
The proliferation of higher power atom and later super massive hydrogen tests created shockwaves that rang around the universi ( for want of a better word ) .
it seems the forced crude manipulation of matter like this works on an interdimensional level .
roswell occured due to the ships that arrived in great numbers to check us out , not being able to cope with high power ground radar initially
some of the ships crashed and were recovered , along with some dead and some alive ET'S
apparently they fixed this , and stopped crashing , until we decided to start shooting them down instead- which has happend a few times.
and most of our greatest scientific achievements have been back engineered from crashed ET technology .
I don't know anything about the physics of faster than light travel. I'd like to believe it's possible but that's only a dream really.
The rest of your post reads like a science fiction novel or movie. Since there's not a thing to back it up. And I do know quite a bit about science fiction.0 -
Advertisement
-
faster than light IS possible , in fact you dont really "move" at all , you bend space until the point you are at and the point you want to be at
co exist -
I know you want to see proof , sorry dont have any - i can only pass on what ive learned in years of studying it .
and i do believe most of stands up to scrutiny to the openminded , who do not believe we are the masters of science.
I do however accept the statements recorded by the disclosure project under stephen greer and the exppolitick projects of the many ex air force , secret service , etc etc people who worked on this stuff
and are now sick of carrying the secrets - and are willing to testify in congress about what they have seen and done.
but alot of these ET'S apparently do not come from other stars , they actually come form other universes - parrallel ones.
universes that exist in the same place as ours but shifted into another dimension .
the reason earth is such a hot bed of activity ( over 50 difffering races visiting apparently ) , begins just before Roswell .
The explosion of the nuclear tests and the bombings of japan didnt just affect earth , they basically "exploded" in dimensions other than ours - parallel universes -.
The bombs had far reaching affects , affecting ET's in these PU'S - it was basically a big sign , to which thay had to repond and look at " what the fcuk are these nutjob apes up to "
and so began the visits of the modern day ET'S
The proliferation of higher power atom and later super massive hydrogen tests created shockwaves that rang around the universi ( for want of a better word ) .
it seems the forced crude manipulation of matter like this works on an interdimensional level .
roswell occured due to the ships that arrived in great numbers to check us out , not being able to cope with high power ground radar initially
some of the ships crashed and were recovered , along with some dead and some alive ET'S
apparently they fixed this , and stopped crashing , until we decided to start shooting them down instead- which has happend a few times.
and most of our greatest scientific achievements have been back engineered from crashed ET technology .
Yes faster than light travel might be possible but it's very hard and very expensive.
But as meglome said the rest is just nonsense and fiction if you're not gonna back it up.
Particularly that nuclear bomb sending shockwaves through parallel universes.
That's just silly.0 -
Particularly that nuclear bomb sending shockwaves through parallel universes.
That's just silly.
I think you and I can both think of a comic where that was part of the plot, am I right Mob?...openminded , who do not believe we are the masters of science...roswell occured due to the ships that arrived in great numbers to check us out , not being able to cope with high power ground radar initially...
Hmmm. So they can detect nukes in other universes and travel across dimensions, but radio waves make them crash?0 -
-
And NASA should not have taken part in the programme if the programme is to be held as a definitive answer to the conspiracy theories. Would you not agree?
The only sources of information regarding the composition of the particles on the surface of the moon are lunar landings - the very things that these conspiracy theories suggest did not occur.
This leads to a problem. If we don't involve those who have direct evidence and experience of the surface of hte moon, who can we involve? At absolute best we can involve a "completely neutral third party" who in turn have their information from the very people we don't want to involve.
If we cut out those who went to the moon, we have no way of answering the question. We also have no proper way of asking the question, which seems to have been overlooked.
I would agree that it is reasonable to be cautious about the information we take from the involvement of NASA, but that's not the same as saying they shouldn't be involved at all.This is based on the fact that on normal dust or sand without the presence of moisture, perfect footprints with depth are impossible to imprint. Would you not agree?
To a point, yes. If, by "normal dust or sand" you are referring to particulate matter formed by standard processes of erosion (primarily wind- and water-driven), then I've no problem accepting that statement at all.
Regardless of how you define "normal" in your usage, though, we end up with two possibilities. We saw footprints, so either:
1) There was moisture.
or
2) The material on the surface of the moon does not have the same behavioral properties as "normal" dust or sand.
Now...without involving NASA, and working only with the evidence you've provided, I've already reached a problem. Those who claim that the footprints must have been faked can only have done so by ruling out option 2....but how can they do that without knowing the composition of "moondust"???
Perhaps they did so by expanding their definition of "normal" to mean "all"? So their claim would be that all dust and sand will exhibit these properties, ergo there must have been moisture.
For this type of claim, it doesn't matter who is involved. If anyone can supply any particulate matter for which this claim is false, the claim is falsified. If NASA went to the moon, then they are in the best possible position to know what type of material they need to duplicate. If they didn't go the moon, then so what.
If Mythbusters were investigating is that it is impossible for a footprint to have been left in particulate matter in the absence of moisture, then it doesn't matter one whit who supplied the particulate matter...this claim is clearly false.
Note - this doesn't mean that NASA went to the moon. It means the claim that the footprints could not have occurred is falsified. We're left back with our original two possibilities...
Either there was moisture or the particulate matter which forms the moon's surface exhibits different properties to whatever "normal" constitutes.
Of course, "normal" particulate matter (on earth) is formed by processes which don't occur on the moon. On the moon, there is no air- and water-flow, which are primary factors in erosion (both in themselves and as a driver of Brownian Motion). Similarly, on earth, our atmosphere protects us from micro-meteorite impacts which occur on the moon.
So given two more-or-less-completely different environments, surely we should ask ourselves why would we expect to find "normal" dust or sand on the moon, because unless we can answer that, it would seem that the very question we're supposed to be asking is based on a rather large assumption.0 -
thecommander wrote: »Just like bacteria kill the advanced aliens in War of the Worlds.
Poor analogy - the invaders had advanced beyond the point of requiring immune systems or well-maintained bodies, allowing technology to replace several biological functions. These guys would have to be advanced to the point where they forgot about things like electromagnetic radiation...0 -
Poor analogy - the invaders had advanced beyond the point of requiring immune systems or well-maintained bodies, allowing technology to replace several biological functions. These guys would have to be advanced to the point where they forgot about things like electromagnetic radiation...
Which they would have to be able to detect to detect nuclear detonations.0 -
If Mythbusters were investigating is that it is impossible for a footprint to have been left in particulate matter in the absence of moisture, then it doesn't matter one whit who supplied the particulate matter...this claim is clearly false.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MythBusters_(2008_season)#Vacuum_myths
That was exactly the myth they were testing.
So myth busted?0 -
I have to say I found the Paul McCartney one interesting and am gonna go read more on it. Hadnt heard much about it before.
If you haven't hear of this one before there are lots of little clues.Not just Abbey Road. I'm convinced they did many of these intentionally.
This may be the best one...
Get a copy of Sgt. Peppers and a mirror.
Put the mirror horizontally across the middle of the cover. right across the bass drum - perpendicular to the album cover (hope that makes sense!)
Now have a look at the image thats created between the top half-the album cover, and the bottom half-the mirror image...its pretty cool.0 -
artvandulet wrote: »Now have a look at the image thats created between the top half-the album cover, and the bottom half-the mirror image...its pretty cool.
Spill...0 -
You know about the conspiracy theory where they have been cloning humans' since the late 1920's and then encyclograph them or something , world leaders do be replaced every now and then with a clone , i think George W Bush is a clone !
And the one where the pyramid on the dollar bill is actually the stargate to mars , to the human/alien mars base ,seriously !0 -
Advertisement
-
thecommander wrote: »Spill...
I just did it roughly with photoshop.
something like this, only a bit better as the image i used was skewed a bit.
Basically it shows: 1ONE1X HE^DIE
with the arrow pointing up to Paul.
The normal cover shows his grave. Look at the ground below everyone. It is a grave site. theres even a left handed bass on it!
Gotta be intentional, no?
BTW, i dont believe he's dead!:D0 -
artvandulet wrote: »I just did it roughly with photoshop.
something like this, only a bit better as the image i used was skewed a bit.
Basically it shows: 1ONE1X HE^DIE
with the arrow pointing up to Paul.
The normal cover shows his grave. Look at the ground below everyone. It is a grave site. theres even a left handed bass on it!
Gotta be intentional, no?
BTW, i dont believe he's dead!:D
No it don't, it say 1one1 he (diamond shape) bie.0 -
Diamond shape- arrowing pointing up and down to Paul.0
-
The only sources of information regarding the composition of the particles on the surface of the moon are lunar landings - the very things that these conspiracy theories suggest did not occur.
This leads to a problem. If we don't involve those who have direct evidence and experience of the surface of hte moon, who can we involve? At absolute best we can involve a "completely neutral third party" who in turn have their information from the very people we don't want to involve.
If we cut out those who went to the moon, we have no way of answering the question. We also have no proper way of asking the question, which seems to have been overlooked.
Actually, the Soviets collected lunar soil in 1970 via the Luna 16 probe and subsequent unmanned missions.I would agree that it is reasonable to be cautious about the information we take from the involvement of NASA, but that's not the same as saying they shouldn't be involved at all.
Not only cautious, but in my opinion the fact that the agency contributed so much to the programme makes the entire exercise worthless with regard to it's purpose of debunking the conspiracy theories.To a point, yes. If, by "normal dust or sand" you are referring to particulate matter formed by standard processes of erosion (primarily wind- and water-driven), then I've no problem accepting that statement at all.
Regardless of how you define "normal" in your usage, though, we end up with two possibilities. We saw footprints, so either:
1) There was moisture.
or
2) The material on the surface of the moon does not have the same behavioral properties as "normal" dust or sand.
Now...without involving NASA, and working only with the evidence you've provided, I've already reached a problem. Those who claim that the footprints must have been faked can only have done so by ruling out option 2....but how can they do that without knowing the composition of "moondust"???
A valid point. However, King Mob has already pointed out the physical characteristics of samples of lunar soil/moondust, which I am assuming would have been verified by the Soviets, so from this could we not extrapolate that the soil should have the properties of 'normal' terrestrial fine sand or dust? (albeit, this would not be 100% definite - my point that we can only be 100% definite beyond a shadow of a doubt if we have the actual moondust remains)Perhaps they did so by expanding their definition of "normal" to mean "all"? So their claim would be that all dust and sand will exhibit these properties, ergo there must have been moisture.
For this type of claim, it doesn't matter who is involved. If anyone can supply any particulate matter for which this claim is false, the claim is falsified. If NASA went to the moon, then they are in the best possible position to know what type of material they need to duplicate. If they didn't go the moon, then so what.
If Mythbusters were investigating is that it is impossible for a footprint to have been left in particulate matter in the absence of moisture, then it doesn't matter one whit who supplied the particulate matter...this claim is clearly false.
I think you are wrong in this assumption. It entirely matters who supplies the test substance - which is at the core of the 'experiment'. Since NASA supplied the substance, how are we to know that the substance was devoid of moisture? You see the problems with their involvement in the 'experiment'?Note - this doesn't mean that NASA went to the moon. It means the claim that the footprints could not have occurred is falsified. We're left back with our original two possibilities...
Mythbusters set out to prove this claim, and they did a terrible job of it. And yet, so called logical skeptics here praise and laud it as if it is infallible and irrefutable evidence. I think this displays serious double standards.Either there was moisture or the particulate matter which forms the moon's surface exhibits different properties to whatever "normal" constitutes.
Of course, "normal" particulate matter (on earth) is formed by processes which don't occur on the moon. On the moon, there is no air- and water-flow, which are primary factors in erosion (both in themselves and as a driver of Brownian Motion). Similarly, on earth, our atmosphere protects us from micro-meteorite impacts which occur on the moon.
So given two more-or-less-completely different environments, surely we should ask ourselves why would we expect to find "normal" dust or sand on the moon, because unless we can answer that, it would seem that the very question we're supposed to be asking is based on a rather large assumption.
Well, why would we expect to find norma; dust or sand on the moon? Fair enough the 'climate' of the moon is completely different, however, we understand what these conditions are (ie. vacuum, lack of moisture etc.) and we have to use these known parameters and what is known to us scientifically in order to attempt to hypothesise in this case. I, however, understand the word hypothesise, and would not present the counter-belief as 100% truth either - but then again, my point here is only that there are two sides to the coin and that this mythbusters entertainment should not be held as gospel evidence. As I've always said, I'm on the fence on the issue, but I hope those who scoff and guffaw at those with different beliefs may pause and reflect on these points.0 -
And type 2 to type 3 civilisations would be ridiculously far advanced and could take thousand of years to develop if at all.
Thousands of years is the blink of an eye, cosmically speaking. There are far older solar systems and planets than earth out there.And still traveling between star would be a huge investment of resources, even with fast than light propulsion.
And even FTL has it's problems. At lightspeed it'll still take you 4 years to get to the nearest star. And current models for theoretical warp drive still require you to travel at sublight speed to lay out the warped space ahead of time.
So aliens traveling to Earth is pretty unlikely.
Again, strictly speaking science tells us that FTL is *not* possible. But bending space time is thought to be possible (even in relativity when Einstein theorised that strong gravitational forces affect space time), and if such a bending were to occur then essentially distance is irrelevent. Point A and point B become the same place. Instantaneous travel. Yes it requires a huge amount of energy, but our understanding of science or energy is far from complete. We don't even know what dark matter is, yet it's supposedly the most powerful material in the universe, and makes up a large percentage of it. Zero point energy likewise. Dr. Kaku is correct in his beliefs that we are an insignificant level 0 civilisation which still burns plant matter for energy. Who knows how a type 2 or 3 civilisation generates energy.
Your argument would remind me of an old argument that humans will never fly because God didn't give them wings.
0 -
The vast majority of lunar samples have been independently examined by geologists around the world.Actually, the Soviets collected lunar soil in 1970 via the Luna 16 probe and subsequent unmanned missions.
I posted a paper about the lunar soil that directly discusses the cohesiveness of it.
Not really, it showed that it's possible to produce a clear footprint in dust if the structure is correct.Not only cautious, but in my opinion the fact that the agency contributed so much to the programme makes the entire exercise worthless with regard to it's purpose of debunking the conspiracy theories.
Again I posted a paper discussing the lunar soil. Did you read it?A valid point. However, King Mob has already pointed out the physical characteristics of samples of lunar soil/moondust, which I am assuming would have been verified by the Soviets, so from this could we not extrapolate that the soil should have the properties of 'normal' terrestrial fine sand or dust? (albeit, this would not be 100% definite - my point that we can only be 100% definite beyond a shadow of a doubt if we have the actual moondust remains)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5taIxlNA_LwI think you are wrong in this assumption. It entirely matters who supplies the test substance - which is at the core of the 'experiment'. Since NASA supplied the substance, how are we to know that the substance was devoid of moisture? You see the problems with their involvement in the 'experiment'?
Looks pretty dry to me.
So are you saying that the lunar soil does not behave like this?
It wasn't meant to be proof of anything.Mythbusters set out to prove this claim, and they did a terrible job of it. And yet, so called logical skeptics here praise and laud it as if it is infallible and irrefutable evidence. I think this displays serious double standards.
The test was to show it was possible to leave a well defined footprint in the absence of moisture, due to the structure of the particles of dust.
Do you believe the explaintion the mythbuster give is no possible?
Again I posted a paper discussing this.Well, why would we expect to find norma; dust or sand on the moon? Fair enough the 'climate' of the moon is completely different, however, we understand what these conditions are (ie. vacuum, lack of moisture etc.) and we have to use these known parameters and what is known to us scientifically in order to attempt to hypothesise in this case.
Do you believe that this paper is not accurate?
No one said it was gospel proof. They did show that some claims of impossiblity do not stand up to scrutiny.I, however, understand the word hypothesise, and would not present the counter-belief as 100% truth either - but then again, my point here is only that there are two sides to the coin and that this mythbusters entertainment should not be held as gospel evidence. As I've always said, I'm on the fence on the issue, but I hope those who scoff and guffaw at those with different beliefs may pause and reflect on these points.
And for someone who is on the fence you seem to think alot of people are in on this conspiracy.0 -
The problem here is kernel you're still using different standards for proof. The US Government, NASA, Mythbusters have to prove it three ways from Sunday but the CT'ers just have to say it isn't so and that seems perfectly acceptable. So I'm taking the best evidence I can find and using that to make a judgement. Let the CT'ers make similar filmed experiments and then we have something to actually compare, but I think they'll have the same findings as Mythbusters and they wouldn't want that.
I'll tell you what, explain one thing to me and I'll lend what you're saying more credence. In all the footage of the Moon landing the dust falls straight back to earth showing there is no air friction i.e. they are in a vacuum. How did they do this if they weren't on the moon?0 -
Yes and they're hundreds of light years away.Thousands of years is the blink of an eye, cosmically speaking. There are far older solar systems and planets than earth out there.
And bending space like that requires the production of a paritle that might not actually exist. Traveling faster than light is not an easy or cheap matter. And that even before you start running into causality.Again, strictly speaking science tells us that FTL is *not* possible. But bending space time is thought to be possible (even in relativity when Einstein theorised that strong gravitational forces affect space time), and if such a bending were to occur then essentially distance is irrelevent. Point A and point B become the same place. Instantaneous travel. Yes it requires a huge amount of energy, but our understanding of science or energy is far from complete.
And what to you mean by most powerful? The only thing I've heard about dark matter is that it's there but we've no idea what it is.We don't even know what dark matter is, yet it's supposedly the most powerful material in the universe, and makes up a large percentage of it.
Again Zero point energy isn't really all it's cracked up to be. And have nothing to do with FTL.Zero point energy likewise.
There are much more efficient ways to get energy.
Well no, but by definition we know there net energy output.Dr. Kaku is correct in his beliefs that we are an insignificant level 0 civilisation which still burns plant matter for energy. Who knows how a type 2 or 3 civilisation generates energy.
Type II puts out about 4 × 10^26 W, about the entire output of a star.
Type III puts out about 4 × 10^37 W, about the entire output of a galaxy.
And again this is assuming a huge amount about them.
It's very unlikey that any other races would know we're even here, let alone visit us.0 -
there is notting faster then light.faster than light IS possible , in fact you dont really "move" at all , you bend space until the point you are at and the point you want to be at
co exist -
I know you want to see proof , sorry dont have any - i can only pass on what ive learned in years of studying it .
and i do believe most of stands up to scrutiny to the openminded , who do not believe we are the masters of science.
I do however accept the statements recorded by the disclosure project under stephen greer and the exppolitick projects of the many ex air force , secret service , etc etc people who worked on this stuff
and are now sick of carrying the secrets - and are willing to testify in congress about what they have seen and done.
but alot of these ET'S apparently do not come from other stars , they actually come form other universes - parrallel ones.
universes that exist in the same place as ours but shifted into another dimension .
the reason earth is such a hot bed of activity ( over 50 difffering races visiting apparently ) , begins just before Roswell .
The explosion of the nuclear tests and the bombings of japan didnt just affect earth , they basically "exploded" in dimensions other than ours - parallel universes -.
The bombs had far reaching affects , affecting ET's in these PU'S - it was basically a big sign , to which thay had to repond and look at " what the fcuk are these nutjob apes up to "
and so began the visits of the modern day ET'S
The proliferation of higher power atom and later super massive hydrogen tests created shockwaves that rang around the universi ( for want of a better word ) .
it seems the forced crude manipulation of matter like this works on an interdimensional level .
roswell occured due to the ships that arrived in great numbers to check us out , not being able to cope with high power ground radar initially
some of the ships crashed and were recovered , along with some dead and some alive ET'S
apparently they fixed this , and stopped crashing , until we decided to start shooting them down instead- which has happend a few times.
and most of our greatest scientific achievements have been back engineered from crashed ET technology .0 -
Advertisement
-
your nearly there bonkey normal matter on the moon/earth, earth is meant to be the same mix as the moon , footprints who care's. did earth not forum with the moon, thats news to me and the science world.The only sources of information regarding the composition of the particles on the surface of the moon are lunar landings - the very things that these conspiracy theories suggest did not occur.
This leads to a problem. If we don't involve those who have direct evidence and experience of the surface of hte moon, who can we involve? At absolute best we can involve a "completely neutral third party" who in turn have their information from the very people we don't want to involve.
If we cut out those who went to the moon, we have no way of answering the question. We also have no proper way of asking the question, which seems to have been overlooked.
I would agree that it is reasonable to be cautious about the information we take from the involvement of NASA, but that's not the same as saying they shouldn't be involved at all.
To a point, yes. If, by "normal dust or sand" you are referring to particulate matter formed by standard processes of erosion (primarily wind- and water-driven), then I've no problem accepting that statement at all.
Regardless of how you define "normal" in your usage, though, we end up with two possibilities. We saw footprints, so either:
1) There was moisture.
or
2) The material on the surface of the moon does not have the same behavioral properties as "normal" dust or sand.
Now...without involving NASA, and working only with the evidence you've provided, I've already reached a problem. Those who claim that the footprints must have been faked can only have done so by ruling out option 2....but how can they do that without knowing the composition of "moondust"???
Perhaps they did so by expanding their definition of "normal" to mean "all"? So their claim would be that all dust and sand will exhibit these properties, ergo there must have been moisture.
For this type of claim, it doesn't matter who is involved. If anyone can supply any particulate matter for which this claim is false, the claim is falsified. If NASA went to the moon, then they are in the best possible position to know what type of material they need to duplicate. If they didn't go the moon, then so what.
If Mythbusters were investigating is that it is impossible for a footprint to have been left in particulate matter in the absence of moisture, then it doesn't matter one whit who supplied the particulate matter...this claim is clearly false.
Note - this doesn't mean that NASA went to the moon. It means the claim that the footprints could not have occurred is falsified. We're left back with our original two possibilities...
Either there was moisture or the particulate matter which forms the moon's surface exhibits different properties to whatever "normal" constitutes.
Of course, "normal" particulate matter (on earth) is formed by processes which don't occur on the moon. On the moon, there is no air- and water-flow, which are primary factors in erosion (both in themselves and as a driver of Brownian Motion). Similarly, on earth, our atmosphere protects us from micro-meteorite impacts which occur on the moon.
So given two more-or-less-completely different environments, surely we should ask ourselves why would we expect to find "normal" dust or sand on the moon, because unless we can answer that, it would seem that the very question we're supposed to be asking is based on a rather large assumption.0
Advertisement