It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Zeta 1 and Zeta 2 Reticuli

page: 5
8
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 16 2007 @ 04:34 PM
link   
Well they could have a laugh and try it, you never know they might just get lucky !!! Any Betty and barney hill fans at SETI ? !!
After all as the famous saying goes:

"It's Life Jim, but not as we know it!"

or better still

"There are Always Possibilities!"

You can guess where i got those quotes from !!

=^=




posted on Jul, 16 2007 @ 05:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tibris

Originally posted by Wirral Bagpuss
Swiftly moving on for a moment. I'd like to ask a question! has SETI pointed their aerials/dishes/antennas towards this star system and if so has anyhting been picked up offically or otherwise?


I don't know, I was under the impression SETI was not pointing there stuff at binary star systems because (as far as we know) life can't develop in them.

[edit on 16-7-2007 by Tibris]


Can't knock it till you try it.



posted on Jul, 16 2007 @ 05:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
Carl Sagans job was to keep the publics attention pointed billions of light years in space. He did a nice job.



Who took Sagan's place on the Working Group (or whatever they call Majestic these days) after he passed away? I don't really see anybody lately with his kind of common popularity, appearing on the Tonight Show, etc.



posted on Jul, 16 2007 @ 10:14 PM
link   
Originally posted by SuicideVirus



Who took Sagan's place on the Working Group (or whatever they call Majestic these days) after he passed away?



I don't think Sagan ever made it to the working group. Like most that get sucked into the program they probably gave him a little mini-briefing leaving most of the good stuff out. After all, you can't let anybody run around with the public that knows very much. Thats a no-no.


I don't really see anybody lately with his kind of common popularity, appearing on the Tonight Show, etc.



I do. Maybe not appearing on the Tonight Show. But well respected and highly regarded. (No, don't bother.)



posted on Jul, 17 2007 @ 09:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by johnlearThanks Byrd. Your opinion is noted and respected. And I also note that you are continuing to use Wikipedia as a sole source of information. Professional and scientific courses of study do not allow this as generally anyone can post anything on Wikipedia. It is not noted as a scientific journal of any sort.

I use Wikipedia as a short cut. I can point to all the scientific articles, but the problem is that they're mostly unreadable for many people and many of them are available only in the journal databases. In order to check my sources, people would have to buy access to those articles or get an account at a university.

Even the abstracts on this one are kind of eyeball bending:
scitation.aip.org...

This one's only a little more readable:
scitation.aip.org...

And the one about its decay products appearing in meteorites is also sort of "huh?" inducing if you don't read astrochemistry much:
www.osti.gov...



Regarding your opinion (posted as fact) "Not pseudoscience... outright wrong," I actually held one of the pieces of Element 115 and was there when Bob and Joe Vaninitti conducted the Alpha Particle experiement with the bell jar, dry ice and Coleman lantern mantle. We videotaped the Alpha particles being diverted down to the small piece of Element 115.


Did you have any way of verifying that it was unupentium? Or were you simply handed a block of something and told it was unupentium? Was it brick-sized or pencil sized, and what color was it?


To those who say this might have been a magic trick concocted by Bob: sure fooled me. Just one question though, "How do you think he got the Alpha Particles to emit from the mantle and turn left?"

There are a lot of sources of alpha particles, including Americum from smoke detectors and the rather deadly polonium and naturally occuring elements such as uranium and thorium and plutonium abd radib.

The "Island of stability" for that element is dubnium -- the "what you end up with" isotope in that decay chain. You can test for that, but you'd need a lab to do it. I couldn't tell thorium from plutonium by looking at it.

If you (or I) were handed something from a source (even a trusted source who might have been lied to by another source they thought was good) and told it was "Element 250" or so, we'd have no way of verifying it as we stood and looked at it. The only way to confirm it would be to send samples off to someone at Berkeley or one of the big research labs... and you'd want to make sure that 3 different labs got the samples to confirm the testing.

Am I right in my guess that you were simply told that this substance was "Element 115"? And what size was the thing, anyway (and color)?



posted on Jul, 17 2007 @ 09:41 AM
link   
Oh... final note... (didn't notice this on first reading)...


Originally posted by johnlear
We videotaped the Alpha particles being diverted down to the small piece of Element 115.


Alpha particles can, in fact, be attracted by plain old magnets or even static electricity. They're pretty divertable. There's a lot of DOE documents on this (and on tokamak reactors and research on alpha particle propulsion systems).
www.osti.gov...

However, Unupentium gives off alpha particles. It doesn't attract them.

I think that he (and you) were lied to.



posted on Jul, 17 2007 @ 11:46 AM
link   
Originally posted by Byrd






Am I right in my guess that you were simply told that this substance was "Element 115"?



Thanks for the post Byrd. Apparently you aren't following any of the threads on Element 115. Let me respectfully suggest that you do 3 or 4 minutes of research before jumping in. Thanks.




And what size was the thing, anyway (and color)?




I would think that you would be doing just a little bit more research before asking "What size was it anytway?" The threads about Element 115 on ATS are very short, less than 3 or 4 pages. So if you don't mind I'll let you find out for yourself what the size is. Hint: its not on Wikipedia (which may be a major obstacle in your research). Thanks again for the post.



posted on Jul, 17 2007 @ 01:27 PM
link   
Hi Guys, here is a website that deals with the various distant planets that you may have heard about, Zeta 1 Zeta 2, and many others.

THis is from a guy called Alex Collier, if you haven't encountered him on your conspiracy travles, he's worth a read you can decide after you've read it, but it is from a book called 'Defending Sacred Ground 1', which are transcripts and discussions regarding the origins of greys, and reptilian races, along with information on moon and mars bases, along with a breed from another planet known as Andromeda.

His work was recorded in 1996


www.exopolitics.org...



posted on Jul, 17 2007 @ 01:45 PM
link   
www.sciops.esa.int...

www.sciops.esa.int...

www.sciops.esa.int...

www.sciops.esa.int...

www.sciops.esa.int...

simbad.u-strasbg.fr...

vizier.u-strasbg.fr...

adsabs.harvard.edu...

aa.springer.de...

Pick a satellite!
As to the Betty and Barney Hill UFO Case, it has been in existence about as long as perhaps some of you people have been in existence, and from 1961 to 2007, traveling at light speed, we already would be there at Zeta 1 & 2 Reticuli if we just could get out of this inertial frame of reference being Stuckies on Planet Earth.
If anyone could get time on the Hubble Telescope or the new one supposedly going up ( I think it is the Webb Telescope ) then we all would know if the resolution was good enough to conjecture about all the planets that may be there if anyone could figure out what the heck is going on. At least Majorie Fish used star catalogs at the time she made her instinctual insight regarding what she thought at the time when she made her sky chart even if Carl Sagan (now deceased) stated that there are billions and billions of stars in this Milky Way Galaxy and that hand-drawn map could be anywhere in this Galaxy, but still is it not still all fascinating that it is still discussed as of today, just because those two stars (Zeta 1 & 2 Reticuli) are just so close as to be near the same as our Sun which seems to have given life here to this Galaxy -- call them Humans!

But in the end, are those two stars actually far enough away from this Planet to actually suppose that humans will not try and get there someday?

At this time the best factual data about Zeta 1 and 2 Reticuli I care to take the time to find - that being the *.pdf file link there at the end of all that catalogging sitting on the computer stuff that happens without going through the process of actually visiting an National Obsevatory and going through the data ones self.

But besides the actually people (one of whom I know but have not spoken to recently) at Kitt Peak and now another one here at this Observatory:
medusa.as.arizona.edu...

I doubt if they would have an answer either.

But then it may not hurt to ask if they even intend to look at Zeta 1 & 2 Reticuli but then I suppose an Observatory would have to be in the Southern Hemisphere where some others are asking this question also:

www.americanantigravity.com...

Did I mention too much?



posted on Jul, 17 2007 @ 07:31 PM
link   

They felt sorry for the nigar and didnt laught at their storry.

Sorry for my english its not too good. Im not rasist.


I am not a moderator here, but I will respectfully say on behalf of EVERYONE here:
If you have nothing nice to say and can't be a civilized human being with civil, non-racist language, get the hell out of our forum. I don't care where you are from or how well you're english is. The "N" word you used is atrocious and should never be said, ever!


[edit on 7/17/2007 by pjslug]



posted on Jul, 17 2007 @ 08:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Diplomat I wouldn't believe anything regressed from hypnosis from some old lady named Betty Hill. Do you really think she could "remember" what some star map looked like inside of a spaceship enough to conclude that it was indeed Zeta Reticuli?


What does her name have to do with anything? Does being named Betty Hill hurt one's credibility?
Also, she wasn't an old lady; Betty Hill was 40 years old when she first reported the incident.



posted on Jul, 17 2007 @ 09:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Diplomat
And also John, if I am not mistaken, scientists on Earth can't even get Element 115 to remain stable for more than 1 second, so how can you say any of Lazar's claims about the element hold any water?


The Uup (that's Element 115 to you all) that was created in a lab was very unstable. All of the atoms decayed down to Dubnium (105) fairly quickly.

www.webelements.com...

A lot of debunkers quickly turn to this as evidence that Lazar is a liar, and it is these debunkers that are NEVER to be trusted. Using the quick decay rate of the lab created Uup to debunk Lazar is either totally dishonest or quite a bit ignorant. And even some of the ignorant debunkers are dishonest because they debunk things while being well aware that they don't know what they are talking about.

The isotope of Uup that was created had 173 neutrons and an atomic weight of 288, and the predicted stable isotope of Uup should have 184 neutrons and an atomic weight of 299.

simple.wikipedia.org...

As to whether or not that predicted model is correct is anyone's guess. However, according to Joe Vaninetti's diary, the stable isotope of the Uup used to fuel the discs has 156 neutrons and an atomic weight of 271.

stealthskater.com...

If you aren't aware of the Vaninetti aspect of Bob's story, then you should give it a look.

I'm not saying that one should believe Bob's story because of this, I am saying that the 115 should neither be used as evidence for nor against Lazar. I am also saying that when a debunker uses the instability of the lab-created 115 against Lazar then that debunker is either promoting an agenda or protecting his own paradigm.

That's my word, son.



posted on Jul, 18 2007 @ 12:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sunsetspawn
A lot of debunkers quickly turn to this as evidence that Lazar is a liar, and it is these debunkers that are NEVER to be trusted. Using the quick decay rate of the lab created Uup to debunk Lazar is either totally dishonest or quite a bit ignorant. And even some of the ignorant debunkers are dishonest because they debunk things while being well aware that they don't know what they are talking about.

The isotope of Uup that was created had 173 neutrons and an atomic weight of 288, and the predicted stable isotope of Uup should have 184 neutrons and an atomic weight of 299.

Sorry Einstien, sounds to me like you’re the one who’s ignorant and doesn’t know what they’re talking about.


If you knew what you were talking about (and my eyes are not deceiving me LOL) then you would know that according to Möller’s Theoretical Nuclear Chart (1997) the longest predicted half-life for any isotope of 115 is only 4 days

ie.lbl.gov...

Next time do some more research before you post.



Originally posted by SunsetspawnI'm not saying that one should believe Bob's story because of this, I am saying that the 115 should neither be used as evidence for nor against Lazar. I am also saying that when a debunker uses the instability of the lab-created 115 against Lazar then that debunker is either promoting an agenda or protecting his own paradigm.

Really? Sounds to me like you’re describing yourself.


While you’re pulling your foot out of your mouth let me see if I can put this into layman’s terms for you…

The successful synthesis of 115 in 2004 proves Möller’s theoretical predictions for it were correct and it’s IMPOSSIBLE for anyone to have a “piece” of 115 that lasts for any practical length of time. (not to mention those nasty radiation burns)

Translation: Bob Lazar's claims are bunk.


As if there was any doubt to begin with…



[edit on 18-7-2007 by Access Denied]



posted on Jul, 18 2007 @ 12:48 AM
link   
Thank you Access Denied, well put.

The only conclusion that would support Bob's side is that Element 115 is an actual naturally occuring element in solar systems other than ours. But just how exactly are we supposed to believe that?

Our knowledge of Element 115 on Earth tells us that it is not stable and cannot be milled and used as spaceship engines. Maybe 115 really does exist as a solid material in other solar systems, maybe it doesn't.

The entire argument boils down to the same thing: It is Bob Lazar's word against the word of Earth's scientists. So decide who you want to believe...



posted on Jul, 18 2007 @ 01:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Diplomat
The only conclusion that would support Bob's side is that Element 115 is an actual naturally occuring element in solar systems other than ours. But just how exactly are we supposed to believe that?

Actually, it doesn’t matter whether or not it exists (forms) naturally anywhere else in the Universe because if it did, it’s half-life would still only be 4 days (in Earth days that is LOL) at the most.


By the way, the argument that maybe the same physics don’t apply in other parts of the Universe doesn’t hold water either since whatever “it” is “there” would have to obey OUR laws of physics in order for it to “be” here. In other words it would lose (change) whatever “special” properties it had. (if that makes any sense)


Originally posted by Diplomat
The entire argument boils down to the same thing: It is Bob Lazar's word against the word of Earth's scientists. So decide who you want to believe...

Wait a minute, I thought Bob claimed he IS an Earth scientist?


[edit on 18-7-2007 by Access Denied]



posted on Jul, 18 2007 @ 01:24 AM
link   
lol, okay, well then let me rephrase that: It is Bob Lazar's word against the word of the rest of Earth's scientists.



posted on Jul, 18 2007 @ 01:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
Originally posted by Byrd

Am I right in my guess that you were simply told that this substance was "Element 115"?


Thanks for the post Byrd. Apparently you aren't following any of the threads on Element 115. Let me respectfully suggest that you do 3 or 4 minutes of research before jumping in. Thanks.


Thank you. I see that you were simply told that this arrowhead shaped piece was Element 115, and I see that you observed alpha particles being "sucked into" it.

Since you aren't a physicist working in the high energy labs or particle accelerators, it's easy to see how someone could set up that demonstration to convince you (falesely) that you had a piece of Unupentium. It's basically high school science to set up that kind of demonstration.



posted on Jul, 18 2007 @ 01:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Diplomat
The only conclusion that would support Bob's side is that Element 115 is an actual naturally occuring element in solar systems other than ours. But just how exactly are we supposed to believe that?


The solar systems would be awfully radioactive...


Our knowledge of Element 115 on Earth tells us that it is not stable and cannot be milled and used as spaceship engines.


The laws of physics don't change in different solar systems in the universe (unlike human laws which can vary even in the same city (Dallas' liquor ordinances are a gerrymandering marvel)).

It'd be pretty bizarre to build a spaceship with alloys involving metals that decay that quickly. You'd take off and the whole thing would crumble even as you flew it.

Not my kinda ship, y'know?



posted on Jul, 18 2007 @ 01:43 PM
link   
Originally posted by Byrd



The laws of physics don't change in different solar systems in the universe.



Since you have never been to another solar system I assume that what you are stating here is an opinion. In fact, Sleepers opinion is that all laws of physics change when you leave this solar system.

I would believe Sleepers opinion to be more accurate than yours for no other reason than the display on your respective avatars. No offense.

Thanks for your opinion and your post.



posted on Jul, 18 2007 @ 03:22 PM
link   

Since you have never been to another solar system I assume that what you are stating here is an opinion. In fact, Sleepers opinion is that all laws of physics change when you leave this solar system.

I would believe Sleepers opinion to be more accurate than yours for no other reason than the display on your respective avatars. No offense.

Thanks for your opinion and your post.




Ok, it sounds like people are getting a little carried away here. What reason could you logically have for thinking that the laws of physics may not apply in other solar systems within our universe? That is a preposterous notion. Could gravity be stronger in another solar system? Sure. Could there perhaps be more dark energy in another solar system? Sure. We are learning new things in science every day, like the possibilities described in string theory. But to think that somehow all laws of physics break down when we leave the outer boundaries of our planets is ridiculous, especially when nothing observed in science has ever pointed in such a direction.



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join