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.

 

Stan Romanek's Mystery Equations

page: 1
5

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 12:26 PM
link   
Is this the same guy who released the video in Denver?

www.rense.com...




posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 01:08 PM
link   
reply to post by polomontana
 


Nice! A lot to read here!
Must be the same man!



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 01:28 PM
link   
reply to post by polomontana
 


One of them is one of Maxwell's equations (known since the 19th Century), and it could be copied out of any textbook. Some of the others look like crude Feynman diagrams.

My problem with this is that equations are just a language. You need semantics as we as syntax, or they are meaningless. Nothing is defined.



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 01:29 PM
link   
I also found his website.

There's much more to this story than just one video.

To call his video fake without any investigation is truly illogical.

First, if you don't know how a real extra-terrestrial or extra-dimensional being looks, how do you know it's fake without any investigation.

The story is much more than just the video.

www.stanromanek.com...

His website is full of info.



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 01:40 PM
link   
his website also has various, and somewhat distinguished, physicists that explain that his equations make sense and need a large background of schooling to understand.
he also has signed witness statements claiming that they saw him "automatic writing". www.stanromanek.com...)%20Stan's%20Mystery%20Equations%20Page_website/



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 03:28 PM
link   
While no expert I can't help but feel cautious about accepting these and other of his assertions without some trepidation. He has, within his current posturing, the capability to perpetrate a fabrication of a very large scale. It would be a devastating blow to the movement of communities who are prepared to pursue this seriously.

I will not be the one to claim this is a hoax or a scam. But I will also not be the one to contend that the message he is delivering is truth or fact.

His 'sponsors' right now are quite enterprising and adept at marketeering, seemingly well versed in PR and notably media-savvy. That raises warning bells in my book. I hope he is legitimate for the sake of those who will vest emotional energy and hope in his story.



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 03:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Maxmars
 

I couldn`t agree more,the way he came across
on the Larry King interview left me cold.
I`ve no idea if he`s a hoaxer or not,but his
body language left me doubting any of his claims,
the way he um and ah`d throughout the whole segment,
stunk of someone who is way way over his head.
That and his claims that it has taken 5 years to analyze
his own"alleged" video footage from 2003??Hmmm!


[edit on 2-6-2008 by Elmer_Dinkley]



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 04:10 PM
link   
The problem is Bob Lazar's name pops up. Go to Stanton Friedman's website and read his take of Mr Lazar. I would put this story in the strong hoax possibility pile.

www.stantonfriedman.com...

Just my opinion.



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 04:37 PM
link   
So far, I just see people saying it's a hoax because of the way he talks and because he accepts money.

These things don't make sense.

Ufologist can't be capitalists? Because they are making money, this means he's lying?

Are skeptics like Michael Shermer and James Randi automatically lying because they are making money off of skepticism?

Most skeptics agree with these professional skeptics without question, even though there making money off of skepticism.

So far there's no evidence to refute his claims. There's opinion and heresay.

I'm not saying it's the ABSOLUTE truth, I'm saying in the context of the rest of ufology it's true beyond a reasonable doubt until counter evidence is presented.

We come to reasonable conclusions all the time absent of ABSOLUTE proof.

We do it in courts everyday.

We do it in the field of Theoretical Physics.

In ufology and the paranormal, the skeptic wants to keep these things "open" until they find an explanation that fits their pre-existing belief system.

Many of these cases have been "open" for years. How long until we can come to a reasonable explanation?

With the skeptic, it's not until an extra-terrestrial lands in their front yards and invites them onto the ship.

We don't have absolute proof that Hawking Radiation is real, yet many physicist have come to a reasonable conclusion.

We don't have absolute proof that there's a multiverse or parallel universes, yet most physicist have come to a reasonable conclusion and they think this is the case.

With ufology and the paranormal, things have to remain "open" until absolute proof is attained.

This is backwards logic.



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 04:38 PM
link   
Elmer_Dinkley where did you get that avatar picture?
isn't that an old pic from a 70's magazine ?
ive been looking for that image.

I think stan and travis walton are the real deal.
Stans back story (encounters) are nuts.
looking forward to seeing that vid


_Orion



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 06:35 PM
link   
reply to post by polomontana
 


Just because I don't get a good 'feel' for this doesn't mean I think he is a hoaxer. I have reservations that I should have identified more clearly are purely my own considerations.

I am not ready to believe this guy..., I believe that in this context, that is my right to state. Just as it is his right to state we will not be seeing his 'definitive' evidence until a time of his choosing.



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 02:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Elmer_Dinkley
 


I think your body language can lie when you are in unfamiliar situation like... on TV! I would imagine the situation worse if you would be in TV to introduce some unclear footage you have managed to film of an alien.

I'm not saying that the alien is real or a hoax. I'm just saying that you can not really determine anything of his body language due the current position he is in.

-Ounou



posted on Jun, 12 2008 @ 08:49 AM
link   
Just visited www.stanromanek.com and saw his equations. Very interesting. They appear to pertain to transit of some sorts to me. The drawings that accompany the equations are consistent throughout his "automatic writings", resembling worm holes.

Any opinions?



posted on Jun, 12 2008 @ 10:02 AM
link   
I've never heard of Stan Romanek before this alien in a window thing started up but after hearing him on radio shows and watching him in interviews on You Tube, he impresses me as being a rather simple, plainspoken man -- someone you wouldn't mind having a chow with at the local diner after bumping into him at the co-op to get an update on his newest UFO sighting ... lol.

I'm sorry, but when people try to convince us that he's this sophisticated con man who's making up stories just for a fast buck... well, this is just a reminder for people here to do their own research by listening and watching this person on those shows on a first hand basis before believing what every so called UFO expert out there... and there are legions of them.. give their own so called expert opinions on this guy. When it comes to stuff like this, you need to just go by your own gut feeling if someone is telling the truth, as they know it, or not. Decide for yourself if he is or not and don't let others do that for you.

At any rate, I'm like Switzerland now on if his alien in the window is really an alien (or whatever) or not and this is coming from someone who's got her own material that's similar to what Romanek claims to have but is yet to show it to the public. This said though, if I had not been getting anomalous images of things showing up in my movies that are seen directly on playback, I probably would be more skeptical about this story regardless that the man comes across as a simple, plainspoken, country bumpkin. But this isn't the case at all.


[edit on 12-6-2008 by wang_ke_~]



posted on Jun, 12 2008 @ 10:04 AM
link   
I wouldn't believe Romanek one bit.

Check out this rense.com article. Stan predicted a catastrophic event on December 12, 2003. Do any of you remember that event? Probably not, because nothing happened! The only question that should be in your mind is whether Romanek is a sincere abductee who has been misled by aliens or simply a flat out prankster...



As for the drawing.. It is a hypercube. A hypercube is essentially a box within a box. It illustrates the concept of a higher dimension. Although I can't be certain of its exact meaning, it seems to show a neighboring solar system (in a higher dimension) very close to our own. Notice how the 3rd (solid) dot up is circled.. I assume this is earth. According to Romanek's vision, the aliens appear able to "tunnel" into our dimension. To the bottom left we see a "blowup" of the alien solar system. The other symbols I'm not sure of but perhaps indicate some impending catastrophe. At the time Romanek drew it he said:


#6 I drew this down after a vivid dream I had in October 10, 2003. No idea what it means. When I did this, I did it freehand and I have no idea how I drew it so straight. I tried to duplicate it again freehand and in no way can I get it this good...Strange.


Yeah sure Stan.



posted on Jun, 14 2008 @ 12:58 PM
link   
I know I've seen that picture before, the "Hypercube" (thanks for that Scramjet76). I can't for the life of me remember where though. Definitely not from alien encounters, maybe a film, or a magazine.

Anyone else out there seen this elsewhere?

I'd like to believe him, it is a great story, apart from the whole looking through the window bit. Surely with worm hole technology they would have picked up, oh I don't know, a little bit of orbital scanning technology along the way?

I'm 50/50 on the hoax/truth scales. Probably cash. Usually is.

It would be great though, if it were true, wouldn't it?



posted on Jun, 16 2008 @ 03:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Sendran
 



I'm not sure where I first saw it either. I'm thinking it was Kaku's book Hyperspace many years ago.

If you take a cube and "unfold" all the sides you'll get a 2-d cross looking thing....



A 2-dimensional being would need to unfold the cube to find an environment he could see and explore... since he is unable to move "up." Likewise, if one unfolds a hypercube we get a tesseract. Unfolding the tesseract into 3-d space gives us 8 cubes. As 3-dimensional beings we can certainly explore these cubes. But once folded back into a hypercube, it's impossible for us to conceptualize the 4th dimension!



posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 05:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Scramjet76
 


Not to mention, he claims he doesn't know how he drew it so straight, but his previous profession is as a graphic artist. The book they have for sale with called the Romanek Case, is described with this:

"Stan has displayed many natural talents from a graphic artist to an expert flute player, and past IQ testing scored him in the genius range, yet ironically, his lifelong dyslexia has limited his academic ability."

I could look up something on the internet, memorize it and write it down. He's been the biggest hoaxer since Billy Meier



new topics

top topics



 
5

log in

join