Evidence of a Glass Layer in the Atmosphere

a reply to: Chrisfishenstein


New here so smack me around for asking this....WHO makes a source "legit"???

Well I actually took the time to research this. Mind you I was 100% aware I was wasting my time and I have done so for the past hour and half, but I wanted to be able to say I read stuff before I made my judgment, so here goes: I was barely entertained, enough to spend a hour and a half on this. It's all a load of crap, of course, but it is put together well enough that it can fool a weak mind into believing in those theories.

Kudos to him for going the ten miles to state his beliefs if they are indeed truly his beliefs. But that's all the praise I can give him. I believe in thinking outside the box. I really do. But some things i.e. everything he argues against just can't be debated...he finds interesting to see videos of stuff like clouds passing behind the moon and proceeds to claim "maybe it's a video thing" but claims it as evidence for fake moon anyway. Then there's the comparison of pictures from ground and hubble, hubble being obvious but he proceeds to claim otherwise to further back his case, saying they all "look similar". Hubble must be fake. I think he found two fake ISS pictures so he assumed all 6 or 8 pictures were fake, because reasons. I think he was just trying to state he was a honest person by pointing out the known two fakes, "so trust me, I'm ethical!"

The disappearing stars bit gave me a headache. So did the glass theory. Fake sun. Concave Earth. Just no to all of it. Give him an audience of several hundred thousand rather than the near nothing he has now and I am certain there would be multiple methods of donating to him. He'd probably have a store up with t-shirts and God knows what else.

Seeing is believing. I don't know what more we can do for people that see the truth with their eyes but still refuse to accept it. They want to view the facts as a grand magic trick. We're being fooled. We're in the Matrix. Our lives aren't as dull and boring as they appear to be. Life is not as simple as being born, living for x years, eat drink work and sleep, then one day die. We must find out the truth!

Eh.

a reply to: Chrisfishenstein

Dude! This wildheretic is an awesome site. I'm so gonna homeschool my kids and teach them stuff from this website instead of textbook stuff. What an awesome psychological experiment that would be!

Or better yet, if someone powerful enough could make it happen, they should teach that stuff to a random public school and then see how the students fare trying to get jobs and advanced science degrees and stuff.

Muahahaha!

a reply to: Farlander

I agree, this thread deserves like a thousand damn flags and stars. Best thread in ATS in months.


PERIOD

a reply to: Legman

For some strange reason I absolutely agree!

I might even sign the petition.

This was the most fun I have had on ATS in a while.

Here is to ya "Lord Steven Christ", bat$h!t crazy or evil genius, thanks for the ride

originally posted by: Ultralight
New here so smack me around for asking this....WHO makes a source "legit"???

That depends on the topic. The 17,000 or so journals available in this master journal list are usually considered good sources:

ip-science.thomsonreuters.com...

Articles from other sources referring to those journal articles are probably legit if they don't distort what's written in the journal too much.

ATS has a partial list of sources it considers not legitimate, such as "Beforeitsnews" and it blocks those, but that's not comprehensive. I wouldn't be surprised if ATS blocks more sources that publish as much BS as beforeitsnews, but they probably have to generate enough traffic or attention to prompt ATS to add them to the banned list.

originally posted by: roadgravel
a reply to: stosh64

Wonder if his IP traces back to some mental institution.

No you will probably find out that his mother is his sister

originally posted by: cooperton
The most compelling argument I have read regarding a layer of glass in the sky:

www.wildheretic.com...

***The article^ is way shorter than it appears, most of the page length is due to the high volume of comments****

Can someone point out particulars that are not true and why? I do not know enough about this topic to refute what he is saying, and his argument seems compelling.

Thanks for giving me a great laugh. That website is... unique. And not remotely credible.

Evidence of a Glass Layer in the Atmosphere

Explain meteorites.

I found this video that may nudge your memory of this guy and may explain why the 'ban' will not be lifted.

Mind you, I think this may be before his 'Lord Christ' days, but it seems he is infamous for this little stunt.



There are hundreds of videos on his YT, I cant stop watching.

I tend to look at car crashes too, I'm in therapy

For those that cant view, he sent messages, yes, plural, about killing the POTUS.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

Thank you for that info. Legitimacy is determined not by the members but by the site controllers. It's their party, I'm ok with that.

a reply to: cooperton

Sorry. You're not going to get that. The whole website is nonsense. There is no way to discuss intelligently. That's not going to happen.

originally posted by: Rosinitiate

Evidence of a Glass Layer in the Atmosphere

Explain meteorites.

Spacemonkeys. (Nods)

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: cooperton
You didn't read the article or the ensuing thread. you've got quite the quick-trigger.

Yes I did. It's dumb and makes some pretty dumb analyses. I've also read the thread and I see that you are ignoring all the posts that have pointed out why this is a dumb concept in favor of defending a flawed perspective. Why do you even care if this is true or not? People have pointed out that it is bogus, yet you are still defending it as possibly true. What stake do you have in it being true?

I think it's responsible to question everything. I also love being berated for asking questions. Cats are pretty cool too.

The issue is not you asking questions. It's when you choose to ignore the answers that's the problem.

originally posted by: Rosinitiate

Evidence of a Glass Layer in the Atmosphere

Explain meteorites.

Meteorites actually commonly contain silicon. The meteorites would, theoretically of course , penetrate the glass layer because it would be hot enough to cause the glass to melt (>1650K) and the meteor would likely contain fragments of the glass, hence silicon's common presence in salvaged meteorites en.wikipedia.org... en.wikipedia.org...

Most interesting is this study which stated the meteorite was "surrounded by silicate material..." link.springer.com...-1 Becoming enveloped in silicon would make sense since it pierced through temporarily impact-induced liquid glass

originally posted by: Ultralight
a reply to: Arbitrageur

Thank you for that info. Legitimacy is determined not by the members but by the site controllers. It's their party, I'm ok with that.

Legitimacy is determined by site content. If it's all stupid nonsense it will be revealed and even if it's not banned will still be rejected by the thinking minds here on ATS.
Ya can't piss on us and expect us to think it's raining.

a reply to: cooperton

What puts the glass back together again? With all the rockets going through one would think the structure as a whole would be severely compromised by now .

originally posted by: AutumnWitch657
a reply to: cooperton

What puts the glass back together again? With all the rockets going through one would think the structure as a whole would be severely compromised by now .

The ozone is deteriorating, is it that crazy to think that a theoretical glass layer in the atmosphere could be deteriorating too? The meteorites contain only very small amounts of this glass on their exterior

When I read the OP I was thinking "layer" of glass to be just glass particles floating around up there.

Not a solid sheet of glass lol.