It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by CUin2013?
There are over a million earthquakes a year and that is normal. The existence of many earthquakes in a particular area is normal too. It's a local event dealing with the local fault zones and is not indicative of anything global.
the point of who made them isn't all that relevant.
Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by crankyoldman
Here is a thread in which the material is based on false claims. Do you have a problem sorting out the chicanery and falsehoods from the truth?
Selected earthquakes of general historic interest.
Let me explain it again then.
Originally posted by GeosAlien
Originally posted by atlasastro
Pane uses BLT to try and assert that there is a difference between CC's.
BLT themselves, admit that they cannot do that. So it defies beliefs that Pane can do that.
Sorry, but I am at a loss here, with your statement.
It is very easy to see the difference in human made (with planks and ropes) with broken stems versus those with the bend stems.
I have seen other explain CC's too, explained by humans making them.
I am on this subject for years, and have seen others explaining the differences.
You opinion is that of majority, I would wager, on ATS.
So, I am one that dares to differ in opinion from others here on ATS.
Now to the subject of The 2012 Equation....
Of course, there are many publications from a variety of roots, that all end with more or less the same conclusions for the "end-date" in 2012.
That's a claim from Ian Lungold, and I have no opinion on that. But let's not argue about a date that moves the whole event one year ahead. It is not adding anything to this equasion.
Your thread and the topic has nothing to do with you?
Nothing to do with me. My point was that perhaps many of those 2012 theories are based on taking the end of the Mayan calendar as fact to base their theory on.
This may well be the case and only time will tell.
Considering the number of prophecies that have come and passed with no actual events, this should provide some insight into that question.
Am not that sure about your claim in this respect, and have seen things moving alone lines that are not in contradiction with the popular theories yet.
I am aware of the changes.
Well, if you dig a bit further you will find distinct recent changes on Jupiter, Venus, Our Sun, Mars etc. Please check it out.
I can be interested in a topic with being on alert about it!
Okay, that's up to you, but apparently you are interested to follow publications in this respect, given the fact of your reading this thread and replies. .... and of course, one thing I agree with you for sure is.... only TIME will tell, and we will not have to wait for long.
I am not on alert regarding 2012. Time will tell I guess.
Just out of curiosity, what other prophetic material have you compared 2012 with in order to differentiate between a plausible prophecy and so as to consider it as not like all the others that have failed to transpire?
Well, here you lost me. ... all the others failed to transpire.... what are you referring to ...??
Originally posted by crankyoldman
There are usually two reasons for this: disinformation agent. I'll assume you aren't. And insecurity.
This seems very odd to me. The thread is about this man's work, a 100 page book. Yet Stereologist and Phage jump in, tag team, derailing yet another thread about how science is the answer to everything and we plebes just don't understand, because if we did, all would be right.
Why do this? You two clearly think everything said that is not backed up by proper data "interpretation" is nonsense and must be stamped out. More, you two often miss the point of certain things. The book interprets what crop circles may or may not say, the point of who made them isn't all that relevant.
You tell us, its your analogy.
Okay, non human terrestrial persons did it - not from outer space but under ground. Now what?
Yes, they are both man made and some are complex in design. Also we can track a trend in complexity in design in both computer chips and crop circles, this further highlights a trend significant to human design and application.
You are aware that energy is altered by things like computer chips? And you are aware that many of the crop circles are very similar to computer chips?
I hear people move aot of money too, in products, DVD's conferences, calenders, jewelry, T-shirts, Music, Tours as well. I hear that moves a lot.
And you are aware that the earth is made up of all sorts of energy connections? There is a connection that man made or not, some of these do just that - move energy in the way chips do.
I really don't see why you insist on doing this, you clearly think that this whole phage and stereo 2012 thing is bs, so just leave the conversation alone.
I really don't see why you insist on doing this sort of thing, you clearly think this whole 2012 thing is bs, so just leave the conversation alone.
Excuse me, but did you read the OP. Did you read Panes work. Pane makes assertions and claims based on CC's. The OP posted this work on a public forum. That means any number of opinions are valid, including those that want to discuss this work from a scientific stand point in order to discover the validity of the work.
There are plenty of threads about things that don't include anything out of the realm of science, at least the science you are privy to (there is a whole lot, I mean a whole lot, you are not privy to) so why jump on these topics asap?
Why don't you state you intentions. Why did you not state that you intend on attacking Phage and Stereo purely because they have more rigorous criteria for establishing the validity of Panes crop circle interpretations.
Maybe if you stated your intentions it would be helpful. I get the feeling you want to make sure NO ONE ever buys into this 2012 stuff - why? What's in it for you to steer everyone away from the idea that life evolves in ways you can't learn about at Harvard? The actions you two are a lot like corrective actions, rather than discourse actions.
It seems the only insecure people around here are those that cannot tolerate other peoples opinions. Sound familiar?
Folks who are very insecure about things, tend to be absolutists, zealots, because the feel their beliefs secure them. They feel if they can covert as many to their way of thinking as possible, they will be secure.
I assume you will feel best if all people drop all consciousness notions and be beholden to science.
The reason I bring this up, the 2012 changes are about changing that very addiction.