The Nikola Tesla Interview Hidden For 116 Years

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: Rosinitiate

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: Rosinitiate

originally posted by: socketdude
I didn't star or flag this thread until I get confirmation of legitimacy.

I also will *not* read the "interview" until I get confirmation of legitimacy, because until then, it's a waste of time because I'm not a fan of fiction.

Unfortunately, in terms of information, disinformation and misinformation - it's guilty until proven innocent.

In psychology, cognitive dissonance is the mental stress or discomfort experienced by an individual who holds two or more contradictory beliefs, ideas, or values at the same time, or is confronted by new information that conflicts with existing beliefs, ideas, or values.[1][2]

Emphasis mine.

Tesla never existed. If you think my post is BS you are just suffering cognitive dissonance.

Or my post, like the OP, is quite simply crap.

I think neither. Regardless of whether or not Tesla had this interview, there is truth in those words. We do create our own reality through thought and the genuine belief we can achieve it gives us the determination to see it through. A relationship through energy and matter that we are a part of.

I found the interview pretty cool regardless if it's genuine. Tesla was pretty cool too so it's nice to think his brain worked that way, it would be, well harmonic.

Because the interview was created to target people who think as you think. Why a hoax would ever be thought about as cool is beyond me, why anyone would think "I like it so I don't care if it's real" is beyond me as well.

And you clearly make stuff up to create your reality LOL, how very ironic of a post. Maybe reread my post hombre. and really read or re-read the "interview".

At least the interviewers name doesn't sound made up or generic: "John Smith".

Pretty certain there was a John Smith around back then... hmm, would probably be next to impossible to trace the right "John Smith". That's pretty handy. (For a hoaxer.)

originally posted by: purplemer
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

If you don't get it, my point is he did exist, and never gave this interview.

Yes thank you i get your point i am asking clarification of the point. What information do you have that he never existed..

purp

None. I am not sure what has you confused.

Yes thank you i get your point i am asking clarification of the point. What information do you have that he never existed..

You so badly did NOT get his point, proven by your second sentence.

"Deny Ignorance"

or alternatively,

Embrace it! (If it fits with your world view and life philosophy)

originally posted by: Rosinitiate
And you clearly make stuff up to create your reality LOL, how very ironic of a post. Maybe reread my post hombre.

and really read or re-read the "interview".

That's not irony. This is irony ... this interview is clearly not made up at all.

So why when I make a false post do you demand sources and proof, and when someone else does it you eat it up? One you want to be true, so you don't question it, the other you don't want to be true, so you do.

That's why hoaxes like this are so successful, people who lap it up, like you.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Applause!!

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: Rosinitiate
And you clearly make stuff up to create your reality LOL, how very ironic of a post. Maybe reread my post hombre.

and really read or re-read the "interview".

That's not irony. This is irony ... this interview is clearly not made up at all.

So why when I make a false post do you demand sources and proof, and when someone else does it you eat it up? One you want to be true, so you don't question it, the other you don't want to be true, so you do.

That's why hoaxes like this are so successful, people who lap it up, like you.

Please share where I asked for sources and proof from you? I don't want anything to be true nor have I ever made such a statement. Only there is truth in what was being shared, there is quite a difference. Nor have I ever stated one way or the other, my existence doesn't hang on Tesla having an interview. You assume to much and accuse others of believing nonesense. If that's not true than you either can't read or worse can't comprehend

In his 1903 interview with Newsweek magazine Tesla talked about Above Top Secret as "made of light with angel wings grafted to the light, which then make it lighter!". When asked by the interviewer, Jane Doe, how this was done, Tesla scoffed, looked her in the eye like he was staring down an uppity five-year-old, and said "Because Above Top Secret is on the inner-nests, a series of tubes that channel light into the eye - both your real eye and the mind's eye - and the eye beholds, can you hear me loud and clear sister It Beholds, multiple data streams flowing in cyberspace which have no physical reality other then light!"

Jane Doe went on to interview Albert Einstein who, upon hearing Tesla's theories, excused himself to index a few patents and do a little writing of his own.

I can never understand the fascination of Tesla.

Most of what is claimed he invented, he actually didn't. Oh well, some people are easily lead.

originally posted by: purplemer

originally posted by: nOraKat
hmm.. don't know about this interview

...I would like it to be real.

The problem is that an effective hoaxer knows how to create a hoax that specifically hits all of the "hot buttons" that he knows exists in the target audience (the audience whom might be most apt to believe the hoax).

Therefore, the reason that you "like this to be real" may be that the hoaxer specifically wrote it in such a way that he knew you would "like it to be real"

...if something is a hoax the ATS detectives are normaly a lot faster at working out if something it a hoax

The first post in response to the original post made about 1/2 hour after the original post showed evidence of a hoax. My post pointed out that Tesla was using the term "black hole" (and saying astronomers use that term) 65 years before astronomers or astrophysicists used that term.

The fifth post made one hour after your OP pointed out that the interviewer was talking about Tesla's attacks on the Theory of Relativity, but the Theories of Relativity came out after this interview. Remember -- this alleged interview is from 1899, but the Theory of Special Relativity was not published until 1905, and the General Relativity was not published until 1915.

a reply to: alldaylong

I can never understand the fascination of Tesla.

Cool cars and great music.

What's not to love?

a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

You're wasting your time. Applying the term "Tesla" to anything at all raises its credence by about 5000%. I could say, for instance, that Abraham Lincoln was assassinated by J Edgar Hoover, as proven in Tesla's writings, and you'd get at least a half-dozen bites.

And not one of the biters would know of one of all the evident mistakes Tesla made. Because Tesla never, ever lied or stretched the truth or made up crap for $$$. Or had OCD, or possibly killed his smarter brother, or was, basically, nuts for the last few years of his life, because Tesla.

So when does this obvious hoax get moved to the hoax bin?

I think we've done about all we can on proving this in so far as, references that Tesla simply could not make: "Black Holes", "Relativity".

The ambiguous "interviewer" John Smith - who is by function, impossible to trace.

The only source is "worldtruth.tv".

I mean, "COME ON!!!?"

originally posted by: Bedlam
...because Tesla.

Very True.

The reason the interviewer mentions Tesla's attacks on the Theories of relativity, even though those theories were not around when the interview was done is "Because Tesla"

Or that the term "Black Hole" used in the interview would not exist for six more decades is "Because Tesla".

Even though this was quickly shown to be a hoax, this can't be a hoax, "Because Tesla".

Probably hard for some to separate the wheat from the chaff when reading anecdotal evidence about Tesla.
All kinds of stories were generated by the contents of this letter from Mark Twain.



Tunguska didn't happen till 1908.
While exploring my grandfathers shed shortly after his death I found a bunch of pictures and a strange device.



Scrawled on the side of the case was a date, coincidentally the date Virginia Eliza Clemm Poe died.
I know my grandfather had been invited to a nuclear test. Some radiation exposure films in the box with the device.
There were some pictures of him standing next to an asteroid crater somewhere. He had once told me that they didn't know how far the chain reaction in the device would extend. Some thought it might end the world.

Based on my experience in the shed I will keep an open mind about Tesla.

All history is hired bull#. We will never truly know what happened, we were not there. But one thing about this interview that struck me is it's too preachy, almost written with the same fanatical tone as the bible.

a reply to: DenyObfuscation

Cool cars and great music. What's not to love?

lolz)

a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

I think those arguments are circumstantial. I did however post a link that showed Immortality Magazine was founded in 1919 or something like that. At any rate, long after the supposed interview.

originally posted by: swanne
a reply to: purplemer

Oh, and I spotted an anachronism in the "interview". The interview was purportedly carried out in 1899.
In the interview, "Tesla" makes a reference to Relativity:

Tesla: Remember, it is not curved space, but the human mind which cannot comprehend infinity and eternity! If relativity has been clearly understood by its Creator, he would gain immortality, even yet physically, if he is pleased.

worldtruth.tv...

But the thing is, Einstein published the Special Theory of Relativity in 1905:

It was originally proposed in 1905 by Albert Einstein in the paper "On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies".

en.m.wikipedia.org...

The interview makes a reference to something that was actually invented 6 years in the future - a whopping 6-years anachronism.

I smell a hoax.

Actually 'relativity' wasn't a word that was invented by Eintein, yes he used it in the title of his theory but what other word could he use? So the fact that Tesla used it doesn't prove anything because he has just used a word that was part of the English language. If he actually said special theory of relativity then you might be on to something.