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.

 

All Of Science Is A Lie

page: 15
55
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 10:49 PM
link   
I'll bet that felt good! Lots of lies out there for sure. In "Theory" science is a good thing. In reality it falls short because of the manipulative ulterior motives. One physicists who couldn't invent and engineer like Tesla could tried to steal Tesla's AC inventions and later became one of the "gifted few" to understand Relativity. All the world is a stage and the NWO agenda out-ways the presentation of truth and reality. Science becomes a propaganda tool and misdirecting science is a key to suppression and control.




posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 10:51 PM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 

So are we to assume that your post is a lie?
Where does the rabbit hole end?
Why should anyone believe you?



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 10:56 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 11:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by tektek2012
this is still going?

don't confuse the guy, he's mentally weak!





It really says more about yourself then it does about the OP.
Attacking him personal.



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 11:30 PM
link   
reply to post by SiKFury
 




Im trying to wrap my mind around the Infinite universe being claimed here while at the same time placing earth or our galaxy at somewhere near the middle.


We're probably not anywhere near the "middle", but discerning our position in the universe is hard to do since we have no stationary point of reference. Now, I'm not sure if the universe's size and dimensions could be defined - or that such a definition would even be applicable or meaningful. I don't know if there is an "edge" or border marking the boundary between parallel universes/non-existence.

As it is, functionally, the universe is infinite. This doesn't mean that there is no "edge" (which I can't state with confidence that there is/is not one), but that no matter how far we travel, we will never reach it. This is because the universe is expanding in all directions. On our scale, the expansion between two points in space is negligible. The more space you put between you and an object, however, compounds the effect of the expansion.

Imagine a balloon without any air in it. Draw four dots on the surface. A pair of dots two centimeters apart, and a pair that are an inch apart. When you inflate the balloon, the space between the distant dots will be substantially increased in comparison the distance of the close dots. From the perspective of a dot on the balloon... everything is moving away from it as though it were at the center. No matter where you are on the balloon, you always appear to be the center from which all else expands away from.

Now (barring some future FTL/tunneling technology), we cannot exceed the speed the light by any known means. Functionally, lets say this is our boundary. That the universe is said to be infinite is (as I understand) is because at some distant point away from you, the space between you and that object is expanding at a rate faster than even the speed of light can travel. So no matter how long you travel, if you cannot exceed the speed of expansion between you and a distant object, you will never reach your destination. You may have heard reference to the "observable universe", which is only a portion of the total size of the universe. The observable universe is our "cosmic horizon" in space. The edge of the "observable universe" marks the boundary at which expansion overcomes the speed of light. The light traveling towards Earth from the stars beyond this horizon will travel forever and never reach the Earth.

So you, traveling near the speed of light, will never reach the supposed "edge of space". It will be, for all intents and purposes, infinite... and you will always appear as if you are at the center.



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 11:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Lasheic
 


All depends on the science of the big crunch. True or false.



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 11:48 PM
link   
Wow this thread really hit the ground running. I am glad we have so many experts on this site for my amusement. I mean education.


Cake, science, math. All lies to trick civilians!



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 11:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by A-E-I-Owned-You
Wow this thread really hit the ground running. I am glad we have so many experts on this site for my amusement. I mean education.


Cake, science, math. All lies to trick civilians!


So you are not a civilian ? Military maybe ?

Doesn't really matter actually. You are trolling. Unless you can back up your claims their all lies to trick civilians. Don't post.

Oh I've not seen anybody seen tricked yet. Well if I don't count the posts where the D- ego definitely tricking someone.


[edit on 8-4-2010 by Sinter Klaas]



posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 12:16 AM
link   
reply to post by ReelView
 




In "Theory" science is a good thing.


Science is neither a positive or negative force. It is inert. It simply is. As a means of generating and compiling functional understandings of how our universe works, it represents a power source. Knowledge is power. The concept of morality is emergent from the function of the universe, but not intrinsic to it's operation. Morality itself is explored, dissected, and explained to the best of our ability by science. It is an expression found only within biological systems, and only recognizably within eukaryotic organisms with a nervous system attached to a cranium (brain). (though not all chordate are craniata). They are most recognizable within social mammals.

Note: This doesn't mean we are endowed with morality by virtue of our nervous system. The roots of certain expressions of morality are emergent from the causal reactions to interaction of natural physical systems and properties (such as efficiency at consuming resources driving increased competition by generating environmental stresses on other organisms.) In-Group/Loyalty, Reciprocal Altruism, Authority, etc can all be defined logistically as survival mechanisms. That's not all there is to it, especially in more complex creatures - such as humans. The logical advantage to reproductive drives being instinctual is obvious, but just because we are compelled to reproductive activity doesn't mean the outcome of that interaction "spreading our genes" is what is driving us... just the impulse to engage in that activity. Hence, the use of contraceptives.


Science is not innately moralized, but is exercised by moral animals. What we do with our technology, whether used in a positive or negative manner, is a reflection of who we are... not of what science represents.



posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 12:35 AM
link   
reply to post by Sinter Klaas
 


Big Crunch models have fallen out of favor, last I recall. It's not "cold fusion" discarded by any means, and is still a viable proposal, but new evidence such as the CMBR hasn't really supported the idea in contrast to other proposed universal death scenarios. "Big Freeze" seems to be the most well supported, but very tentatively.

I'm a bit wary about the concept of endlessly cyclical models of expansion contracting. It may well end up being the case, sure, but the idea is roughly analogous to religious concepts of reincarnation and experience has shown that such concepts have higher instances of science abusers misrepresenting and misinterpreting it's implications to try and shoehorn in their favorite religious/moral concepts.

[edit on 9-4-2010 by Lasheic]



posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 12:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Lasheic
 


There's also the Big Wow theory for the origin of the Universe:

telicthoughts.com...



posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 12:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Lasheic
 



I'll take a 300 million dollar pay day please.

To me, 300 million is an epic azz ton of money. Money that was wasted. Money that could have improved the lives of families allowed to keep it.

A bunch of criminal scientists sent some IRS goons after the good people of America and forced them to hand over their loot at gun point instead of asking for donations like decent people.

Then they blew 300 million of it on a total fraud of a project.

As to writing a paper that supports LR - LOL


You know as well as I do the paper could be absolutely flawless and never get published due to the criminal peer review process.

Have a look and see what happens when you question the "mainstream"

www.advancedphysics.org...

[edit on 9-4-2010 by mnemeth1]



posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 02:23 AM
link   
Science is real. There has been many breakthroughs in science. Anti matter stuff like that does truly exist. Science is a very important part of life in this technology era. until you have done and experience what these scientist have done and accomplished you don't truly know if science is false. i say getting facts straight and knowing the truth not creating a false world in one's mind is needed before coming up with conspiracies like this one.



posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 03:31 AM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


Yes, yes, you're jaded. We get the picture. Super duper.

While I'm sure you've struck a chord with your fellow misanthropes, I don't find baseless assertions, unsubstantiated accusation, broad sweeping generalizations, and stressed exaggerations of contempt for dramatic effect as adequate substitutes for a valid point. Are you even interested in making one, aside from the point letting everyone know how jaded you are?

BTW, when the hell did the APF.org message board become the voice of mainstream science? I mean, they might have some pretty sharp individuals over there, but a discussion board is a discussion board. Hardly a comparable medium to compare with peer-review journals.

Besides, everyone knows that New Scientist Magazine is the authoritative mainstream voice of Science! (*Rage* imminent in: 3, 2, 1.... )

[edit on 9-4-2010 by Lasheic]



posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 07:17 AM
link   
there is another universal language and i mean Universal

any intellect being can have the basic configuration to understand is geometry the perfect example is what was placed on pioneer 10 and have to say it !! Crop Circles! and even our own ancient structures !

example Giza pyramids aligned with the Orion belt well known and proven

how about the Mayan Pyramids of the , moon, sun, earth la Ciudadela does it looks almost the same! ? www.philipcoppens.com...

pioneer 10 plaque



wiki
en.wikipedia.org...



yeah Numerology and Geometry at its best next in line Calculus? the mixture of the 2






[edit on 9-4-2010 by Wolfenz]



posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 09:13 AM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 



well just in case you or any member want to refute of what im saying you need listen to this !!! right from the mouth of Former Minister of Defense talks openly about UFOs !!!!

listen carefully from 2.00 mark
Former Minister of Defense talks openly about UFOs ( Canadian ) Paul Hellyer en.wikipedia.org...


if you have seen my previous post's on this thread you will see government officials are coming out


want another !!

Nick Pope British Defence Ministy UFOs Top Secret No More!



Former White House Chief of Staff Admits U.S. UFO Cover Up



we can argue all day and night

we are still writing with our finger in the sand ! compared to the visitors or should i say Aliens when we say that's impossible to do
lets try to find a way to make the impossible possible as Edison said with trial and error of the light bulb

from Edison quotes good ones too
“I haven't failed, I've found 10,000 ways that don't work”
“I never failed once. It just happened to be a 2000-step process.”
“To invent, you need a good imagination and a pile of junk.”
Many of life's failures are people who did not realize how close they were to success when they gave up.”

[edit on 9-4-2010 by Wolfenz]



posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 09:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Lasheic
 


I take it you didn't bother to read the advanced physics thread I linked.

The thread is about a Chinese physicist that has discovered the Michelson Morely experiment can't prove light is constant. It details his dealing with the APS and the editors of the PRL, PRD, PRA.

His paper


This paper questions the hypothesis that Michelson-Morley experiment (MMX) can prove the principle of constant light speed. It judges that, on the contrary, the MMX negates this principle. A reanalysis of the Lodge Rotating Steel-Disc experiment implies that the MMX experiment cannot negate the hypothesis that Earth drags ether. This paper proposes a new theory that the ethers on the Earth surface gyrate together around the Sun by the dragging of the Earth, but according to the newest experimental results, are not synchronous with the Earth rotation. It also points out that superluminal behavior has apparently occurred.


Obviously not a very welcome finding.



posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 10:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by mnemeth1

Originally posted by ImaNutter
Alright I'm going to end this thread once and for all... Brian Greene who is a professor of Physics and Mathematics at Columbia University had this to say at the end of one of his books about the state of where we're at and where we're going and what we know...

"We are, most definitely, still wandering in the jungle," - Brian Greene, Fabric of The Cosmos

We're getting there, we just haven't arrived yet. It's because all the time the ignorant are becoming the enlightened.

To say all of science is a lie.... is a complete and utter lie.
To say all of science is ignorant.... is also a lie.
To say SOME of science is ignorant.... is true.

Tis it, tis all.

Everyone have a great day, this was a fun thread to be in.



All of science is a lie.

When you corrupt cosmology, you corrupt all of the sciences.

Cosmology tells us the approximate age of the earth. How matter is formed and what it constitutes. The ancient history of the earth. The history of our oceans. How stars are formed and energy is transported across space. etc.. etc...

The fundamental tenants of cosmology directly impact the assumptions of ALL sciences.

There is not a single science out there that in some way does not make assumptions based on the work of cosmologists.



Talk some sense would you?, you're starting to annoy me and everyone. LOOK AT APPLIED SCIENCE, yes there is THEORETICAL SCIENCE, if you can find some THEORIES which are not THEORETICAL, i.e. you have the ability to test things on a cosmological level, then please do. But don't say science is a lie. When it's clearly a progression and on going.

Think about it, applied science is performed by consistently observing the results of something that can be used practically. Unless we can do that, we can only pose theory, i.e. the big bang.

Until you can definetly and reasonably say beyond doubt that you can proof something, it remains THEORY, NOT LIES.
Don't say it is a lie, you're just demeaning science.

The very reason why your typing on your PC, so do some research about history and applied sciences, and how theory is ongoing and develops into application.

People like this don't even deserve science.



posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 11:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by tektek2012
this is still going?

don't confuse the guy, he's mentally weak!


That's not a valid argument, but a foolish personal unfounded opinion you should keep to yourself! Shame on you.



posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 11:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Neo Christian Mystic

Originally posted by tektek2012
this is still going?

don't confuse the guy, he's mentally weak!


That's not a valid argument, but a foolish personal unfounded opinion you should keep to yourself! Shame on you.


Yes, it is silly to call people names. Instead show them up using science and logic, they will never win. and it's clear that this person's claims are unfounded and illogical.

[edit on 9//4/1010 by misteRee]



new topics

top topics



 
55
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join