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.

 

Nassim Haramein's Delegate Program

page: 24
17
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 12:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by beebs

. . . Normally under the Copenhagen interpretation, the state a particle occupies is determined the moment the state is measured. . . .

wiki entanglement


Intuitively, I'm thinking that a measurement alone for determining the state of a particle is too narrow.




posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 01:09 PM
link   
Thinking about several of the posts on this thread, I did a search looking for information about techniques used in debate that are intended to derail an honest discussion rather than to further the truth.

I think this list is interesting. From "DEBATING TECHNIQUES":

* Refute By Example
* Refute By Exposing Contradiction
* Minimization and Denial
* Instant Denial
* Understatement
* Admit a Small Fault to Cover a Big Denial
* False Comparison
* Give a Non-reason Reason
* Divert Attention — Change the Subject
* The Positive Accomplishments Sidestep
* Declare Victory
* The Story Sourcing Distraction
* The Drama Queen
* The Personal Loyalty Red Herring
* Deflect Criticism and Blame By Deligitimizing It
* Deligitimize Criticism and Rebuttal in Advance
* Spurious Deligitimization of Evidence
* Spurious Rejection of a Question
* Answer A Question That Was Not Asked (To Avoid Answering One That Was Asked)
* Answer a Question With A Question
* Surfeit of Questions (Plurium Interrogationum)
* Monopolizing the Question (Hypophora)
* Obfuscate
* Attack Without Appearing To Attack By Using Paralipsis or Apophasis
* Sarcasm, Condescension, and Patronizing Attitudes
* Damn with Faint Praise
* Reductio Ad Absurdum
* Rationalize
* Exchange A Term
* Frame The Argument
* Argue with Unrealistic Hypothetical Situations
* Misrepresent Your Opponent's Position, or Mischaracterize Your Opponent, or Mischaracterize His Statements or Questions
* Nit-Pick and Split Hairs
* Quibble
* Hit And Run
* Hifalutin' Denunciations
* Make Unreasonable Demands
* Make False Demands
* Shift the Burden of Proof Onto Your Opponent
* Double Standards
* Demand an Uneven Burden of Proof
* Demand Uneven Standards of Acceptance
* Specious Argument
* Spurious Agreement
* Escape via Ignorance
* Escape to the Future
* Escape via Relativism
* Escape via Irrationality
* Pack the House
* Embarrass Your Opponent
* Obtuseness — Refuse to See the Point
* Laugh It Off
* Dominate the Conversation, Talk Non-Stop, and Interrupt Constantly
* Escape via Bullying and Intimidation



posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 03:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Mary Rose
 


That is a great list.

I am sure I have been guilty of most of them at some point or another... Can only try to stay away from them - and the first step is acceptance and identifying them!


----

Interesting article, claims the proton is much smaller than previously thought(which throws a wrench into the previous discussion here, and the established theories used for the discussion as well...):
'Horrendously Intense' Laser Shrinks the Proton



posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 04:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by beebs
Interesting article, claims the proton is much smaller than previously thought(which throws a wrench into the previous discussion here, and the established theories used for the discussion as well...):
'Horrendously Intense' Laser Shrinks the Proton


Them lasers are something else!

I don't want to take the thread off-topic, but on my reading list is a book about dentistry, including the use of lasers - I think in place of root canals.

Technology is wonderful.



posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 07:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


my bad, sorry was late last night and I had been digging in a few different sites, It WAS part of the schiller institute site, but as it has several pages offering info about verdi's pitch I will need to find it again...still I need to anyway for my own records so no problem...

and 10 minutes later...


The correct source...

press ctrl+f then type mozart then hit 'next' and its the first paragraph that comes up.

Looking at this whole thing more objectively then I have in the past I've decided I must be certain of the 432Hz 'history' & true 'value' before promoting it further...to ascertain anything without proof sets up obstacles in your own path as well as others....

-B.M

P.S) MaryRose - remember what Nassim mentions about the jesuits?

look at this post quoting from the book "fingerprints of the gods" by Graham Hancock...

www.abovetopsecret.com...


..there are connections between the jesuits/vatican/knights templar/rosicrucian order, bach & mozart, ancient egyptian/sumerian/dogon/peruvian/mayan/persian/greek & roman cultures, a numerical system that can be applied/coded into music; but also 'appears' as a specific sequence of numbers, or different numbers that follow the same set of rules as that specific fore mentioned sequence, in the movements/behaviors of planetary bodies & the architecture of ancient monuments + their alignment to planetary bodies + their alignment to other parts/aspects of the earth.

and then, there are connections between a majority of the things mentioned above, and an advanced grasp of science that is 'out of place' when one considers commonly accepted 'history'....and all the connections relate to either the A=432 tuning system, its mathematics, or the broader field of 'sound' including psycho-acoustics, phantom notes, acoustics & resonance, and further extending into knowledge of standing waves, sonic levitation & knowledge+use of cymatic's evident in creative uses of the geometry of sound waves as a code; a means of hiding a sequence of numbers/pitches.

-B.M

[edit on 7/7/10 by B.Morrison]



posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 06:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by B.Morrison

P.S) MaryRose - remember what Nassim mentions about the jesuits?

look at this post quoting from the book "fingerprints of the gods" by Graham Hancock...

www.abovetopsecret.com...


..there are connections between the jesuits/vatican/knights templar/rosicrucian order, bach & mozart, ancient egyptian/sumerian/dogon/peruvian/mayan/persian/greek & roman cultures, a numerical system that can be applied/coded into music; but also 'appears' as a specific sequence of numbers, or different numbers that follow the same set of rules as that specific fore mentioned sequence, in the movements/behaviors of planetary bodies & the architecture of ancient monuments + their alignment to planetary bodies + their alignment to other parts/aspects of the earth.

and then, there are connections between a majority of the things mentioned above, and an advanced grasp of science that is 'out of place' when one considers commonly accepted 'history'....and all the connections relate to either the A=432 tuning system, its mathematics, or the broader field of 'sound' including psycho-acoustics, phantom notes, acoustics & resonance, and further extending into knowledge of standing waves, sonic levitation & knowledge+use of cymatic's evident in creative uses of the geometry of sound waves as a code; a means of hiding a sequence of numbers/pitches.


There is no doubt in my mind that there is something in this. I know that there has been an advanced civilization before ours, and that advanced civilization built the pyramids.

Everything we've been taught in formal education needs to be re-examined. Interspersed with knowledge has been suppressed technology and historical disinformation.

This science of sound is absolutely fascinating. And what could be more satisfying than focusing on beautiful music and the heavens?

I have also read that 528 Hz heals DNA.



posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 11:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose
The Unturned Stone By Harry Massey and Peter Fraser.


This quote, which is the header for Chapter 8: Measuring the Quantum Electrodynamic Body-Field, shows the importance of an inter-disciplinary approach to knowledge, which is Haramein's approach:

"In fact, biologists are trying to interpret as much as they can about life in terms of chemistry, and, as I have already explained, the theory behind chemistry is quantum electrodynamics."

- Richard Feynman, QED: The Strange Theory of Light and Matter



posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 06:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Mary Rose
 

As far as I'm aware, Dr. Len Horowitz is a very bad man.

It is on public record that within 2 weeks of the U.S SARS scare all those years ago, that Horowitz was attempting to peddle an un-aproved aromatherapy 'treatment' described by horowitz as 'a cure for SARS'.

He named it after Dr. Urbani who sacrificed his own life for the lives of others, if he had not been there to give us all the early warning that it was coming, we would not have been able to deal with it as quickly & minimize harm as well as we did.


29 March 2003

Dr. Carlo Urbani, an expert on communicable diseases, died today of SARS. Dr. Urbani, worked in public health programs in Cambodia, Laos and Viet Nam. He was based in Hanoi, Viet Nam. Dr. Urbani was 46.

Dr. Urbani was the first WHO officer to identify the outbreak of this new disease, in an American businessman who had been admitted to a hospital in Hanoi. Because of his early detection of the disease, global surveillance was heightened and many new cases have been identified and isolated before they infected hospital staff. In Hanoi, the SARS outbreak appears to be coming under control.

“Carlo was a wonderful human being and we are all devastated,” said Pascale Brudon, the World Health Representative in Viet Nam. “He was very much a doctor, his first goal was to help people. Carlo was the one who very quickly saw that this was something very strange. When people became very concerned in the hospital, he was there everyday, collecting samples, talking to the staff and strengthening infection control procedures.”


and Horowitz had the audacity to call his 'magic-water' the Urbani sars cure.


Horowitz has also been accused of stealing the 'bible code' & altering it before publishing it as his own work which includes the 528Hz 'miracle' tone.
He continuously spouts on his many websites how 528Hz is used in the medical field to repair damaged DNA, but what is NOT mentioned is that the repair work is done by destroying the damaged DNA which removes it from the non-damaged DNA, and the use a 528Hz beam of something to do it, so to suggest that a Hz beam used for destructive maintenance, can then be used for constructive restoration as part of a set of tones, is a little absurd to me.

Other names to put on your fraud/evil list -
Dan winters,
Drunvalo Melchezidek.

the man who originally began research into the bible code was a guy called joseph, horowitz has yet to pay him a dime.

he is knights of malta under the guise of the knights of hospitaller, and while I would not deny that the hospitaller have done good things for the world, Horowitz has done nothing but show us how not to be....

-B.M

P.S) there is a Horowitz here on ATS who confronted me about my claims, I reciprocated & have heard nothing back yet....

[edit on 8/7/10 by B.Morrison]



posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 07:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by B.Morrison
. . . un-aproved aromatherapy 'treatment' described by horowitz as 'a cure for SARS'. . .


I dont' know anything about aromatherapy; however, one thing I would point out is that "unapproved" doesn't mean anything because the F.D.A. does not protect the public and is controlled by Big Pharma. Herbal and natural remedies and vitamin and mineral supplements are threatened. This is not a good thing. This is not to say that aromatherapy could cure SARS. I don't know. But F.D.A. approval for anything doesn't make me rest easy.


Originally posted by B.Morrison
. . . but what is NOT mentioned is that the repair work is done by destroying the damaged DNA which removes it from the non-damaged DNA, and the use a 528Hz beam of something to do it . . .


I didn’t know about this. Thanks for the info.


Originally posted by B.Morrison
. . . he is knights of malta under the guise of the knights of hospitaller . . .


I knew about this and have had this in the back of my mind. It is something that has to be weighed. There is another issue with Horowitz and that is a bad experience that Dr. A. True Ott had in his association with Dr Horowitz.

From an article by Greg Szymanski entitled ”Len Horowitz, A Dark Doctor In Disguise, Remains a Vatican Shill”:

When made aware of the knighting of Horowitz, Ott, a PhD, had this to say from his Utah home:
“This is VERY interesting.

“Shortly after “Lenny” (Horowitz) visited me in Cedar City, reviewed my production line, and was a “live” guest on my radio show, I was raided by the FDA and DOPL, arrested, charged with a 1st degree felony and had machines and inventory confiscated. I lost over $100,000, not to mention the many thousands in attorney fees to protect myself!

“I tried calling Lenny to see if he would help with my case in any way, and he refused my calls and NEVER bothered to return them – even though he promised me that he would “help my business in any way”.

“I began to wonder if he wasn’t a wolf in sheep’s clothing – and was involved in the “natural health” arena primarily to identify and remove potential threats to the Medical Mafia.

“My suspicions are now confirmed. The AMA’s Px Drug agenda is directed by the Knights of Malta through the Vatican!”





[edit on 7/9/2010 by Mary Rose]



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 09:01 AM
link   
I see on Nassim's website that he has posted responses to a critic going by the name of "Bob-a-thon."

From "Letter to Dr. Bob-a-thon":

I wanted to start with thanking Dr. Bob-a-thon for his efforts in elucidating some of the mathematical topological problems I hadn’t had time or interest to address. I typically avoid wasting my time participating in these so-called debunking sessions. However, as I can see that the gentleman has invested substantial efforts in this particular example, and because it is such a prime and typical expression of the reactionary tendencies defending against all odds the status quo and proclaiming it as “the truth”, I feel obligated to reply.

I’d like to clarify however that these tendencies are usually found at a certain level of scientific development which typically includes professors at college level that do an excellent job at regurgitating previously accredited work, but don’t necessarily understand the process of discovering new science, and certainly new physics, in this case. This process, unlike what is described in the gentleman’s comments below his article, is a process of creative thinking and application that determine the adequacy of the fundamental concepts of a theory prior to the notability typically associated with previously established theories. I am sorry, but the true scientific process does not include personal attacks, character assassinations and name-calling. Although these methods are commonly found in today’s scientific communities, they are certainly not an appropriate way to conduct science or to conduct oneself as a professional in any field of expertise. New ideas that may seem completely alien to a current approach indeed may become the standard of tomorrow. . . .


From "The Schwarzschild Proton Manifesto":

"Sit down before fact as a little child, be prepared to give up every preconceived notion, follow humbly wherever and to whatever abysses nature leads, or you shall learn nothing" - Thomas Henry Huxley

As mentioned in the few first paragraphs of the general reply to the gentleman, I would like to take a moment to thank my critics for giving me the opportunity to reply in a constructive, professional way to questions about my work. To elucidate our approach, we offer a response to one of the more vocal, yet suspiciously anonymous critics, "Bob-a-thon". In this anonymity, there is no knowledge of our critic's accreditations and publications and as such, it is easy for him to portray himself as the arbiter of truth and the authority representing true science. Furthermore, the Bob-a-thon in many of his posts reaches levels of frustration, wanting to get his physics questions answered while asking the general public to answer them instead of asking the questions directly to the physicists in the group who may be able to give an appropriate answer. This is a typical tactic used to discredit. Unfortunately, the form of much of "Bob-a-thon's" discourse is replete with ad hominum attacks which question our integrity, intelligence and motives, among other things. While perhaps emotionally cathartic for the writer, this style detracts from the seriousness of the issues being discussed. Those yet to be familiar with actual debates in physics might be persuaded by his attacks and appeals to authority. We find the following quote a fair description of " Bob-a-thon's" style:

"Anyone with an axe to grind is compelled to make his arguments as outrageous and incendiary as possible". - President Barack Hussein Obama, May 2010.

Clearly, when a professor is teaching the standard model day in and day out, utilizing very famous reference books and teaching students that these are, in a sense, immutable facts, to have someone come along with something that contradicts everything that you have been taught and are teaching every day is extremely upsetting, and for good reasons. After all, these established laws of physics have been there for decades, in some cases, and have been worked on by thousands of well-known physicists. So how could a virtual unknown come up with something that is completely contrary to what has been thought to be correct? A professor or an individual in this position may be inclined to go on a crusade to put an end to such calamity and save the uninitiated by redirecting them towards the obvious established truth. This seems to be a fairly easy task since much of what is said by this obviously "delusional" individual fails to agree with the "known facts" of physics. But wait; what if these new ideas were correct, or, at the very least, contained some truth? A professor might understand well what works in the standard model, but perhaps has yet to understand the details of what does not work and its implications. Indeed, why should he study what fails to work in the standard model? . . .



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 10:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose
"Letter to Dr. Bob-a-thon"


From the comments section for "Letter to Dr. Bob-a-thon" there is this question from "Dan":

When can we expect some kind of peer review from a legitimate scientific establishment? Whats the status of the papers in the scientific community? Besides the best paper award for The Schwarzschild Proton, there is virtually nothing else out there for laypeople, like me, to verify any of the science.


Here is the response:

Thank you for your comment, Dan.

There are many issues related to publishing in peer review journals, and last year Haramein wrote a rebuttal to various comments that were flying around the Internet. Part of that document addresses these issues. However, we did not make this document public but only directed inquiries to it at the time. Here is the link . . . Please note that his latest paper, The Schwarzschild Proton, is currently awaiting publishing in a mainstream scientific journal and should be available in that form by the fall.


The link in question: Nassim's document part of which addresses peer review



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 10:53 AM
link   
From the Testimonials page on Nassim's website:

Peter Rowlands, Ph.D.
Research Fellow, Department of Physics, University of Liverpool
Governor / Honorary Governor, Manchester College, Oxford

. . . I have attended many conferences over a period of more than thirty years, but this one was quite exceptional for the fact that the participants, though coming from very different directions, found such synergy between their different viewpoints that discoveries were being made in real time, as a result of the extraordinary cross-fertilization that developed. The work of Nassim Haramein, Elizabeth Rauscher and their colleagues at the Project opens up the possibilities of explaining phenomena on many scales, through its significant insights into gravity, the Coriolis force and a related scaling law, and its mathematically rigorous approach. . . .



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 12:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose
"The Schwarzschild Proton Manifesto"


Regarding the conference that is alleged to have been about computers and not physics:

The CASYS '09 conference . . . where the Schwarzschild Proton was an invited paper. . . . the CASYS conferences are not about computers . . . but are about computing anticipatory systems, in other words, strategies to compute anticipatory systems as defined by the director and founder of the conference. . . . This applies significantly to physics, and the conference is well attended by international physicists, physics teams and physics Nobel laureates alike.



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose
"The Schwarzschild Proton Manifesto"


I like this quote; I think it says alot. This is looking at the big picture:

Historically, consider the Copernican revolution. Copernicus, using a heliocentric cosmology and circular planetary orbits was able to replace the much more complex geocentric Ptolemaic system including various epicycles. In fact, while a simpler and more realistic model, the early Copernican results were less accurate than those many epicycles could then produce. This lack of accuracy was used to show the "falsity" of the theory until the use of elliptical orbits and other advances improved the accuracy and made the Ptolemaic system far too complex. Despite critics and an early lack of accuracy, the Copernican description of the solar system was better than Ptolemy's. So remember, accuracy is only one criterion of correctness of a theory.



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 02:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose
"The Schwarzschild Proton Manifesto"


Here's Bob-a-thon:

'The Schwarzschild Condition'

The main idea of this paper is that a proton may be considered as a black hole, and that two of these orbiting each other at the speed of light under gravitation alone provides a model for a nucleus.

The ultimate aim is to dispense with the need for the strong force altogether, and replace it with an interaction based on gravity, thereby unifying quantum theory with general relativity. This paper is intended to be a significant first step along this path.

The 'Schwarzschild proton' is a black hole with a mass of 8.85 x 10^14 gm. In plain English, this is 885 million metric tonnes.

The reason this mass is chosen is that it's the mass that a black hole would need to have in order for it to have the same Schwarzschild radius as a proton - hence the name.

Haramein takes the radius of a proton to be 1.32fm.

(This is in fact the Compton wavelength of a proton, not its radius, at least not by any measure that I'm aware of, but it's good enough for now.)


Here's Nassim:

. . . the actual radius of the proton is still the source of much debate and is considered to be unknown at this point. We found large variations of the estimates of the proton radius size . . .

It's important to note that all these variations occur because of other fairly complex schemes of approximations of the data, and as a result the proton radius is certainly poorly established at this time. We used the Compton wavelength as a first order approximation to see if the concept had any merit whatsoever. We modified it in various ways using the proton charge radius and other approximations and found our results to remain consistent. . . .

. . . Therefore, our proton radius value is actually a worst case scenario utilized as a first order approximation, knowing fair well that a full tensor analysis is necessary. We thought (Dr. Hyson, Dr. Rauscher and I) that this would be adequate for now.



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 10:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Mary Rose
 


that's awful what happened to that Ott fellow, however based on the research I've done & all my experience with various concentrated compounds, I can't see how watering down something, can make it more potent, which is the basic premise behind aromatherapy is it not? or am I thinking of something else & accidentally referred to it as aromatherapy? because I'm not suggesting that different scents can be therapeutic....

-B.M



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 10:14 PM
link   
reply to post by B.Morrison
 


From Wiki:

Aromatherapy is a form of alternative medicine that uses volatile plant materials, known as essential oils, and other aromatic compounds for the purpose of altering a person's mood, cognitive function or health. The effectiveness of aromatherapy is yet to be scientifically proven, however some evidence exists that essential oils may have therapeutic potential.[1]



Homeopathy (also spelled homoeopathy or homœopathy) is a form of alternative medicine, first proposed by German physician Samuel Hahnemann in 1796, in which practitioners use highly diluted preparations. Based on an ipse dixit[1] axiom[2] formulated by Hahnemann which he called the law of similars, preparations which cause certain symptoms in healthy individuals are given in diluted form to patients exhibiting similar symptoms. Homeopathic remedies are prepared by serial dilution with shaking by forceful striking, which homeopaths term succussion, after each dilution under the assumption that this increases the effect. Homeopaths call this process potentization. Dilution often continues until none of the original substance remains.[3]



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 10:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by B.Morrison
. . . Horowitz had the audacity to call his 'magic-water' the Urbani sars cure. . . .


From freerepublic.com website, "Doctors Advance Effective SARS Treatment":

Dr. Horowitz and Dr. Joseph Puleo, a leading naturopathic physician, a founding member of the World Natural Health Organization, relied upon Dr. Towers's findings to formulate the "Urbani SARS Formula." This, along with reducing lifestyle risks, may stop the mysterious SARS illness from wreaking further havoc, they say. . . .

Here's the low down on the contents of the doctors' final Urbani SARS Formula.


Lomatium dissectum root extract . . .

Devil's Club (Oplopanax horridus) . . .

The Rosaceae (Amelanchier alnifolia and Rosa nutkana) or Saskatoons . . .

Xylitol Sugar . . .


Sounds like an herbal remedy to me.



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 10:46 PM
link   
Irregardless of whether Nassim is fully credentialed, he is very compelling, and combines alot of information in his presentations. It appears he is self taught, but those connected to his project are not, they seem fully credentialed. Is there something not right up front about theirs?

www.theresonanceproject.org...



Elizabeth Rauscher Ph.D.
E. A. Rauscher, Ph.D. (Nuclear Physics and Engineering, University of California at Berkeley). Dr. Rauscher was a nuclear scientist and researcher at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, and at Stanford Research Institute, Professor of Physics at John F. Kennedy University of California, research consultant to NASA (space shuttle program) and the U.S. Navy.
Dr. Rauscher is author of over 250 scientific papers, 4 books, 3 US patents and held 1 European patent.

Recognized for major contributions in Marquis Who's Who of Men and Women in Science, Who's Who in California and in Technology Today, Leading Consultants in Technology, DOE top ten man and women in USA science award, USPA Leaders of America Life Time Membership Award. Dr. Rauscher also received the award for Outstanding Contribution to Astronomy and Astrophysics, American Astronomical Society Meeting, Lawrence Hall of Science, and the CSPS Hall of Fame Award by the California Society for Physical Studies for Outstanding Research in Bioelectromagnetism, the Foundations of Quantum Theory, and Contributions to Humanity. Also recipient of a Medal of Honor for contributions to Unity of the Sciences, Seoul Korea, and many other awards. Dr. Rauscher is author of over 250 scientific papers, 4 books, 3 US patents and held 1 European patent.


Michael T. Hyson Ph.D.
Dr. Hyson attained a BS in Biology at the University of Miami in 1970, followed by a MS in Biology in 1973, and a Ph.D. in Biology in 1976 with specialization in neurobiology. From 1977-79 he pursued a Post Doctorate in Bioinformation Systems at CalTech. From 1980-87 he worked as a systems engineer for electrostatic levitation at Jet Propulsion Laboratories (JPL). From 1988-89 he functioned as research director at Pacific American Launch Systems. From 1990 to the present day he is the Research Director of the Sirius Institute.


Does Cal-Tech have a habit of supporting unusual science? Dr. Dan Burisch gave his presentation, his interviews with Project Camelot brought lots of criticism, and the main part was he couldn't as a black op be credentialed. I filed things away and then two things occurred, John Lear called him the honorable Dr. Burisch, and it hardly matters what one thinks of John, as controversial as he is, he is credentialed. Then, his Cal-Tech presentation. Some exotic science seems connected with this I think.

What I'd like to see is a disclosure and release of the tehcnolgy they're all sitting on.

So far, been very impressed by his presentations. Also, the comments about the video regarding the comet, that had SOHO shots and an incredible miracle happened right on the SOHO screen. A very long arm from the sun, a cme, but with an elbow belted it away, and that was the first time I knew the Sun was consciousness. I suppose others think life is filled with coincidences all over the place, but whoever was criticizing him, thanks for reminding of that video, it was acutally eye opening.



[edit on 9-7-2010 by Unity_99]



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join