It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


free energy costs those in power

page: 1

log in


posted on Jul, 23 2006 @ 07:25 PM
i beleive that the "anti gravity technology and other technologies that fly in the face of "modern physics" are going to be accepted very soon. this is going to be PUBLIC knowledge very soon, and the MILITIARY and government already has this information and they are using it

first one large MENTAL block in getting people (who dismiss it as crazy, or impossible) to see how this is possible first you have to look at flaws in scientific thinking and then u can allow yourself to go into some critical thinking in the matter

anyone ever wonder if the model used to create scientific facts, is completely flawed

i mean u get an idea (theory) and because this idea can not YET be proved wrong (by the knowledge we had at the time it was challenged" ,it becomes a a fact.

i mean at what time to you declare it can't be proven wrong a year, two years, who determines this, and after it is declared a a scientific fact and can't be disproven later (after it is given fact status even if we learned we misunderstood some things which we used in the past as a basis to determine it was a fact),

it seems some scientific facts could just be thoeries that have yet to be disproven and these old mistaken facts could disprove new more credible theories that don't stand up to the false facts

and after it is considered a fact it can't be disproven again even if there is evidence against it because it couldn't be accurately proven in the first place (that is the best part)

Scientific Law: This is a statement of fact meant to explain, in concise terms, an action or set of actions. It is generally accepted to be true and univseral, and can sometimes be expressed in terms of a single mathematical equation. Scientific laws are similar to mathematical postulates. They don’t really need any complex external proofs; they are accepted at face value based upon the fact that they have always been observed to be true

what if the knowlege we have now is more accurate and differs from that at the time the scientific law went into being. wouldn't that mean that the " it doesn't really need real proof its just always been observed to be true" line is almost silly

and the last few words could be better rephrased to say " perceived that way"

because observations are based on perceptons and perceptions change especially with advances in knowledge and also depending on the values of a society and to say somethng came into scientific law because it was always observed to be true or " perceived that way" at a time when the observations were limited by our own limited knowlege at the time seems almost absurd

the technology and ideas are there they are well known in some circles and there is no real benefit to those in power to have this become public knowledge. PERIOD

this may concern UFO's and the technology to build or replictate them

learn how the egyptian pyramids may have been ( the energy generators of the civilization) not just some tombs

and much much more

[edit on 23-7-2006 by cpdaman]

[edit on 23-7-2006 by cpdaman]

posted on Jul, 29 2006 @ 04:41 PM
Scientific thinking of today is flawed because it has not evolved with scientific discovery. new discoveries require new mindsets to except and improve upon them.

Scientific method is wonderful. But it will do us no good if it stagnates.

Good post.


log in