Nassim Haramein's Delegate Program

page: 2
17
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 31 2010 @ 08:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose
Looking for more information about the Delegate Program, I pulled up this blog . . .


This blog is by someone by the name of Rob Bryanton.

I enjoyed his YouTube video:








posted on May, 31 2010 @ 08:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Mary Rose
 


So the first, second, and third dimensions don't exist, eh?

I would think even non-scientists would be able to see through that argument.



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 09:03 AM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


So let me get this straight, you're saying that Haramein is not credible and your evidence to this is a blog written by a guy named Bob.


Please provide one tidbit, link or source that debunks Haramein's Schwartzchild Proton paper.

Just because his work is way over your narrow minded head doesn't mean that it is not legitimate.

Do us all a favor and stop talking out of your azz.

Thanks.



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 09:08 AM
link   
Searching for blogs of people who have completed the Delegate Program I came across this website and find this interesting:

. . . Another field I am particularly excited about is the unification of Science and Spirituality. I have given workshops on the Science of Spirituality at three drug and alcohol conferences and I recently completed a delegate traning with nassim Haramein's Resonance Project to be able to better understand and present his Unified Field Theory. . . .


Maybe we need a term for the unification of science and spirituality. Maybe we already have that term; I don't know.



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 09:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by OnTheFelt
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


So let me get this straight, you're saying that Haramein is not credible and your evidence to this is a blog written by a guy named Bob.


Thanks.


I don't know a thing about the Schwartzchild Proton paper. Even if I read it, I wouldn’t know if he was right or wrong. But I do know that there's a video of him calling Comet Neat Nibiru and pretty much everything he says on there is wrong. He claims that it was almost 2x the size of Jupiter and the gravitational pull should have been pulled Mercury into the sun
www.ufo-blogger.com...

www.space.com...

Plait said the idea that NEAT is as big as a planet is just plain wrong.

"The actual comet itself, the chunk of rock and ice, is only a few miles across," he said. "What we see in the [SOHO] images is the cloud of gas surrounding the nucleus, evaporated off the surface by the heat of the Sun. That cloud is huge, but the comet itself is tiny."


More
n why he is wrong: skeptic.danielalderman.com...

If Haramein is so smart, you would think he would know better. Or at least do better research. I think it knocks a big hole in his credibility.

If you don’t like my links, you can look up Comet Neat yourself and see where he was wrong.



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 09:51 AM
link   
Found a blogger by the name of Jim Bertagnolli who mentions Haramein's work. In a post entitled "Let There Be Light" he says:

. . . Where does this energy come from? One of the first thought experiments that perplexed Einstein at a very young age, and every physicist today, is the concept that if you could follow a beam of light at the speed of light, what would you see? And the only answer is an absolute paradox – instantaneous oscillation. Light does not experience time, yet it oscillates.

So starting from the net of zero, since nothing can exist without equal ups and downs, we come to the ideas of yet another pioneer in modern physics: Nassim Haramein of The Resonance Project, a non-profit organization dedicated to the “unification of all sciences and philosophies emerging from a complete and applied view of the physics underlying the wheelworks of nature,” whose award-winning paper “The Schwarzschild Proton” describes, with mathematical accuracy, a proton with a miniature black hole at its center, in a constant loop of creation and destruction. . . .



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 11:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by OnTheFelt
Please provide one tidbit, link or source that debunks Haramein's Schwartzchild Proton paper.

Just because his work is way over your narrow minded head doesn't mean that it is not legitimate.


It's in the link I already posted, by yes Bob the physics teacher. If Haramein had a legitimate peer reviewed paper published and you wanted me to look for some scientists rebuttal to that, your request might make sense. But scientists don't go around debunking the non-peer-reviewed fantasies of every crank that pops up.

And just because my work on the flying spaghetti monster is way over some people's narrow minded heads doesn't mean that it is not legitimate. Well maybe it isn't but without peer review it's just as legitimate as Haramein's work. I can mix in a little real science with the fantasy too, you know. There's a reason for peer review and if we dismiss the need for peer review, any crank's idea is as good as any other crank's idea.

Actually that's how scientists often do their debunking, by NOT giving peer review approval to a paper.


Originally posted by Pauligirl
I do know that there's a video of him calling Comet Neat Nibiru and pretty much everything he says on there is wrong.


Well, I'm glad some people can see past the smoke and mirrors. But I'd also think that the veracity of his claim that the first, second and third dimensions don't exist should also be pretty blatantly obvious even to laypeople.



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 11:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
. . . Bob the physics teacher. . .


If he's a physics teacher he may simply have an emotional attachment to what he was taught.



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 03:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pauligirl
But I do know that there's a video of him calling Comet Neat Nibiru and pretty much everything he says on there is wrong.

Stewart Swerdlow comments in his Q&A about Niburu and Neat:


Its NEAT
Posted: February, 19, 2003
Why isn't anyone talking about the HUGE comet NEAT that looks like it's about to hit the sun? NASA and the Navy have stopped updating the solar images on their websites as of 6 o'clock this morning. This thing appears to be larger than Jupiter, according to one discussion group. [see the govt website at Click Here]

What do you think is up with this, Stewart? Why is no one talking about it?

Stewart's Reply: I went to the url you gave me but it was not found. Cannot get that document on the internet. This is probably Niburu/ Marduk that has been pushed off course. If it hits the sun, then we will experience a large solar wind/ blast that can disrupt electrical systems on the earth. The resultant sun explosions, minor really, can also cause weather anomalies for a while. Anyone with more info on this is welcome to write in.



NEAT
Posted: February, 26, 2003
Just a quick update on the N.A.S.A Comet (Neat). Basically they are saying that this coment, being twice the size of pluto and composed of nickel-irridum has been struck by a large coronal mass ejection while circling the sun. They are saying that it will not hit the Earth , however there is a chance that we might pass close to the tail and showered with a few meteors from the tail. --- Peace, Ryan

Stewart's Reply:Very interesting. As I told my readers in the past, Niburu/Marduk was either going to be destroyed or pushed off course. I guess this was it. Thank you for this information



Invasion Earth
Posted: April, 29, 2007
In Montauk:The Alien Connection you write a lot about a Draco invasion force that is coming. Was this invasion supposed to be in 2003 (through a "planetoid" that was pushed away)?

Stewart's Reply: The planetoid Niburu was destroyed in April 2003, just after the Iraq invasion. Under Baghdad were star gates that would have provided an escape or invasion route. The American forces controlled this in March 2003 and then the Illuminati blew up the planetoid near Jupiter. Fragments are still flying into the Sun and near the Earth.



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 04:51 PM
link   
Here's a blogger's post with a Haramein quote:


Nassim Quote
Published October 31, 2009 learning , manifesting Leave a Comment

I’m in the middle of a Nassim Haramein weekend, and took this quote out of my notes…

What fun!!
Gail

“When you explore your center, you’re exploring infinite gravity. You’re going toward singularity, infinite potential, the force that holds your existence (all the information that you are) in a coherent pattern in one specific instance of spacetime that you call yourself. That [gravity] is the force that supports everything you do, all that coalescences experience. This is your link – that supports all you do.
This is your link to infinite existence, infinite density. It’s the gravitational force toward infinite density that centers you.”

– Nassim Haramein, square brackets added



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 04:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose

Stewart Swerdlow comments in his Q&A about Niburu and Neat:



I'm sorry, but if there was a point here, I didn't get it.
It's just somebody else being wrong.



posted on Jun, 1 2010 @ 02:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
Nassim Haramein - Fraud or Sage?


The reason I want to 'debunk' him is because he's wrong. I teach physics and maths to students, and I think it's important to let them know when something is wrong. It's important to be able to tell truth from falsehood - if we don't, then we lose sight of truth altogether. I don't like it when someone pretends to have insights into the laws of physics that all the scientists of the world are supposedly too dumb to have realised, but in fact has nothing but charisma and a silvery tongue.



When are scientists going to realize that their paradigm is just plain wrong? The fact that there is no unified field theory proves that they have not figured out how things work. If anyone comes & challenges the dominant paradigm, then they're a threat. The scientists defend the little box they're stuck in b/c their careers depend on it. A lot of scientists promote theories to "truth," when they're really just theories. Science is fine, but it has its limits. It's only relevant to things that are subject to the scientific method. JMO



posted on Jun, 1 2010 @ 03:48 AM
link   
didn't nassim recently win best paper from the university of liege?
sorry if this has already been brought up.



posted on Jun, 1 2010 @ 06:55 AM
link   
People who have completed the Delegate Program can go on to Haramein's Emissary Program.

Again searching for bloggers posting about Haramein's work this morning, I pulled up this website, Evolver, and I see information about a 2 day seminar taught by one of his official emissaries that took place last month in Petaluma, CA. The website notes:

On Sunday the informational download continues at 9am all morning until lunch and then in the afternoon there will be some special related material delivered from a couple of amazing guest speakers:

David Ray:
David has a Physics degree from UC Berkeley and has been a science researcher for NASA as well as Nassim Haramein and the Resonance Project. He will present a condensed summary of cutting-edge research in astrobiology, and an emerging history of Earth, life and who we are, as they relate to cosmic and galactic events that have shaped our planet.



posted on Jun, 1 2010 @ 08:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose
Here's a blogger's post with a Haramein quote:


“When you explore your center, you’re exploring infinite gravity. You’re going toward singularity, infinite potential, the force that holds your existence (all the information that you are) in a coherent pattern in one specific instance of spacetime that you call yourself....

This is your link to infinite existence, infinite density. It’s the gravitational force toward infinite density that centers you.”

– Nassim Haramein, square brackets added


It looks to me like Haramein is saying we are infinitely dense (or moving towards that). Perhaps those who believe him, really are?




[edit on 1-6-2010 by Arbitrageur]



posted on Jun, 1 2010 @ 08:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by darkcircle2009
didn't nassim recently win best paper from the university of liege?
sorry if this has already been brought up.

No it was AT the university, not FROM the university. The university was renting out space to a bunch of computer programming geeks who have absolutely no qualifications to evaluate a physics paper, they are the ones who liked his paper. The only involvement of the university was renting out space for the conference.

ETA: I tried to find out how many other physics papers were submitted at the computer conference (One has to wonder why physics papers are being submitted at a computer conference in the first place?), but I wasn't able to find out how many other papers were submitted in that category. The reason I was looking for that information is to see if there were actually any other physics papers submitted at that computer conference. If Haramein's was the only physics paper submitted, it could be named both the best paper and the worst paper in its category at the same time, but of course there was no award for worst paper. If anyone has any information about how many other papers were submitted that competed against Haramein's for that award, post it up, I'm curious about that.

[edit on 1-6-2010 by Arbitrageur]



posted on Jun, 1 2010 @ 01:21 PM
link   
Searching for physicists' comments about Haramein's work, I came across an article on the bibliotecapleyades.net website dated May 29, 2009 by Michael Salla, Ph.D. entitled "World Renowned Physicist Challenged over Free Energy Machines."

The world renowned physicist is Dr Michio Kaku and the challenger is Dr Robert Koontz. The article states:

. . . Dr Robert Koontz, a nuclear physicist who has worked in various government projects and held Top Secret classification, pointed out the fallacies in Dr Kaku’s thinking. Dr Kaku, according to Dr Koontz, needs to reconsider the feasibility of non-conventional energy devices. Otherwise he may suffer the same fate as early scientific critics of the Wright Brothers - critics dismissed the idea of heavier-than-air flying machines as impossible.

Haramein's name comes up in the article here:

. . . Another way for an unconventional or “free energy” device to work is for it to use rotating electromagnetic fields using magnets, plasma, or other electrical conductors.

This creates what is called a “torsion field” where energy is generated from the rotating objects. According to Dr Elizabeth Rauscher and Nassim Haramein from the Resonance Project, torsion fields power all known rotating objects in the universe from suns and galaxies, to atoms.


I'm wondering whether resistance to Haramein's work by mainstream physicists has anything to do with the establishment's resistance to free energy.


[edit on 6/1/2010 by Mary Rose]



posted on Jun, 1 2010 @ 01:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pauligirl

Originally posted by OnTheFelt
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


So let me get this straight, you're saying that Haramein is not credible and your evidence to this is a blog written by a guy named Bob.


Thanks.


I don't know a thing about the Schwartzchild Proton paper. Even if I read it, I wouldn’t know if he was right or wrong. But I do know that there's a video of him calling Comet Neat Nibiru and pretty much everything he says on there is wrong. He claims that it was almost 2x the size of Jupiter and the gravitational pull should have been pulled Mercury into the sun
www.ufo-blogger.com...

www.space.com...

Plait said the idea that NEAT is as big as a planet is just plain wrong.

"The actual comet itself, the chunk of rock and ice, is only a few miles across," he said. "What we see in the [SOHO] images is the cloud of gas surrounding the nucleus, evaporated off the surface by the heat of the Sun. That cloud is huge, but the comet itself is tiny."


More
n why he is wrong: skeptic.danielalderman.com...

If Haramein is so smart, you would think he would know better. Or at least do better research. I think it knocks a big hole in his credibility.

If you don’t like my links, you can look up Comet Neat yourself and see where he was wrong.


Well, it's quite clear from your post that you know little about Nassim Haramein, or his presentation which he gave at rogue valley in 2003. Because if you did, then you would realize that he never even mentioned the name "Nibiru" or made reference to it. Yes, he speaks about comet neat and shows you the SOHO footage but that's it.

Stop spreading BS that you obviously have no intimate knowledge on except again what you took from a blog.

For the record I've been to Haramein's presentations so I do have intimate knowledge of his work.


EDIT TO ADD:

I should also point out that your link from UFO Blogger is complete garbage, because again he postulates that Haramein was referencing Nibiru which is a complete lie. His reference of comet Neat has been taken completely out of context.

It's very disappointing that you obviously have not watched Haramein's Rogue Valley presentation but still feel that you can comment on something you are getting from a third party.

DESPICABLE!

[edit on 1-6-2010 by OnTheFelt]



posted on Jun, 1 2010 @ 10:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by OnTheFelt

Well, it's quite clear from your post that you know little about Nassim Haramein, or his presentation which he gave at rogue valley in 2003. Because if you did, then you would realize that he never even mentioned the name "Nibiru" or made reference to it. Yes, he speaks about comet neat and shows you the SOHO footage but that's it.


He says the comet was two weeks in advance of the Sumerian text, and for a ten thousand year prediction that was pretty good. I don’t think the Sumerian text mentions Comet Neat.

He also says it’s a comet almost 2x the size of Jupiter. It’s not. “"The actual comet itself, the chunk of rock and ice, is only a few miles across," he said. "What we see in the [SOHO] images is the cloud of gas surrounding the nucleus, evaporated off the surface by the heat of the Sun. That cloud is huge, but the comet itself is tiny."
www.space.com...

Scientists thought we were toast. Nope.
It’s difficult to get data on this. No, it’s not.
And it should have pulled Mercury into the sun. Nope.
Really sloppy on his part, but I guess that’s what the folks want to hear.



posted on Jun, 2 2010 @ 12:55 AM
link   
I watched Nassim's presentation at the Rogue Theater.

I tried to watch Crossing the Event Horizon but it wasn't as good or I had had enough after 8 hours at the Rogue Theater


Love Nassim's work. Did you know he predicts the singularity at the exact same position as Marko Rodin? They mention it in a video. Nassim also admits to marijuana use... "If you're gonna smoke something it at least should be green..." Then a funny laugh... and the guy wanting a smoke says "True". Then Nassim says, "True says the rastafarian." then laughs again.
Ahh, darn it's been removed


If you doubt his credentials just look at his web site. Nassim FTW





new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join