"Vortex Based Mathematics by Marko Rodin"

Originally posted by buddhasystem
Evidence is evidence and not "judgement".

What do you think you do when you look at two photos and draw a conclusion?

Originally posted by Mary Rose

Originally posted by buddhasystem
Evidence is evidence and not "judgement".

What do you think you do when you look at two photos and draw a conclusion?

You draw a conclusion. You've seen more recent photos of that Martian hill, what conclusions did you draw?

reply to post by buddhasystem


I don't have the reliable photos I need.

The photos you are referencing are irrelevant.

Originally posted by Mary Rose
reply to post by buddhasystem

 

I don't have the reliable photos I need.
The photos you are referencing are irrelevant.

You have the tendency to dismiss evidence that is inconvenient because it goes against your belief-based choices. You have some pretty good material on that Martian face. You can correlate it to what is seen in the old photo and then in same photo that was rendered in pseudo-colors for better contrast. But you don't want any of that. And what part of pseudo-color rendering technique did you not understand? Did Sagan conceal the use of this technique? No he did not. Calling it "doctored" is dishonest at the very least. Was Sagan right in his analysis? Yes he was, as evidenced by more recent and better photos, which is exactly the evidence that you reject because it doesn't fit your pre-conceived conclusion.

reply to post by buddhasystem

Originally posted by Mary Rose

The doctoring of frame 70A13 in the Parade article—by overlaying the image with a color filter to obscure details that corroborate frame 35A72—is a particularly unscientific and indeed barbaric act. One cannot even defend Sagan by saying that this frame was supplied to him already doctored by NASA, for Richard Hoagland had personally shown Sagan the original frame prior to the publication of the Parade article.18 Sagan was well aware that 70A13 confirmed 35A72 and had told Hoagland that he found this intriguing.19 So why did Sagan lie?

I am certain there is much more information to consider surrounding this issue.

I will see what else is said in the book by Graham Hancock, as well as other information.

There is also the testimony of O'Leary regarding the '61 Brookings Institution report advising the government not to be truthful concerning anything to do with ETs, and O'Leary's testimony that Sagan was of the belief that it was in the best interest of the government to cover up anything to do with ETs, because there would be culture shock.

Additionally, the account of Sagan writing and talking about psychological aberrations that people see faces everywhere, and whipping out a deformed eggplant at lectures and claiming it looked like Richard Nixon, raises a red flag for me. This is not scientific, objective, behavior. It is using the technique of ridicule, which is a fallacy of reason.

Originally posted by Mary Rose
Additionally, the account of Sagan writing and talking about psychological aberrations that people see faces everywhere, and whipping out a deformed eggplant at lectures and claiming it looked like Richard Nixon, raises a red flag for me. This is not scientific, objective, behavior. It is using the technique of ridicule, which is a fallacy of reason.

I have fancy tiles in my bathrooms, imported from Spain. Textured as aged stone, with lines, veins, and all sort of wiggles. When looking at it, I can't help noticing all sorts of images and mostly faces, if looked closely. What Sagan noted was a statement of observation, a tendency -- do you remember that case when the face of Jesus appeared on a grilled cheese sandwich? Or picture of Virgin Mary on the wet stones of the overpass?

Or that image

More can be found in Wikipedia

And look, he was right. There is nothing artificial about that pile of rubble on Mars. Despite what his frothing at the mouth critics were saying.

Originally posted by Mary Rose

The doctoring of frame 70A13 in the Parade article—by overlaying the image with a color filter to obscure details that corroborate frame 35A72—is a particularly unscientific and indeed barbaric act.

The alleged doctoring for Parade magazine was of frame 70A13, not 35A72, the 1976 NASA photo.

The allegation is that the color filter was used to obscure details corroborating frame 35A72.

Originally posted by buddhasystem
Despite what his frothing at the mouth critics were saying.

The same use of the fallacy of ridicule is demonstrated in the above.

Originally posted by Mary Rose
If the only evidence you will consider is a photograph provided by NASA, then I would say you're limiting yourself considerably.

In Chapter One of Dark Mission - The Secret History of NASA, by Richard C. Hoagland and Mike Bara, Copyright 2007, Published by Feral House, it is pointed out that the Lander of Viking 2 was originally planned for Cydonia, but the venue changed within a few days of the 35A72 photo being discovered as significant. The reason given for the change was that Cydonia was too rocky. However, the new venue chosen was Utopia Planitia, which is even more rocky.

Originally posted by Mary Rose

From Hancock, Graham (2010-08-11). The Mars Mystery: The Secret Connection Between Earth and the Red Planet (p. 129). Random House, Inc. Kindle Edition.

. . . So why did Sagan lie?

Continuing on page 129:

Whatever his motives, he appears later in life to have regretted his actions. In his last book, The Demon-Haunted World (1996) he actually praised the Cydonia researchers and said that the Face deserved a closer look.20 Was he here voicing a personal truth, now unrestricted by the laws of NASA?

Footnote 20 is:

“I hope that forthcoming American and Russian missions, especially orbiters with high-resolution television cameras, will make a special effort—among hundreds of other scientific questions—to look more closely at the Pyramids and what some call the Face and the City.” Demon, New York: Quoted in Hoagland, Monuments of Mars, 471.

Originally posted by Mary Rose

In this video I am spinning and levitating a 180 gram Neosphere with a 1" diameter. The beautiful coil shown in the video was hand crafted by my friend and colleague David Klingelhoefer. Also working closely with me on this series of testing is Jack Scholze. For more information check out www.alexpetty.com....

A Jack Scholze video is featured on PESWiki:

Rodin Coil and Lolo Neoball Resonant Spinner (Part I | video) - Jack Scholze demonstates how the coil gets a metal ball spinning (up to 50,000 rpm) and keeps it spinning at a distance (around 7 feet), even nearly 1.5 minutes after being turned off, apparently via unusual magnetic resonances. "There may also be 'radiant' energy coming into the system via the recurrent collapses of the mag fields on each cycle." (YouTube / jacksholze; July 18, 2010)

The YouTuber's description:

Uploaded by jackscholze on Jul 18, 2010

Followup to last video, shows that the spin resonance works on the the Neoball some distance away from the coil with the power off. No perpetual motion here, but unusual magnetic resonances going on. The neoball spins for at least 1 minute and 20 seconds after the power is disconnected which is remarkable.

Tried other coils with lesser effects, so the Randy Powell Rodin geometry seem to work best. The coil here is a 4.5 inch diameter so-called 18x36 Abha or April Wind, with all 12 wires connected in 2 connected sets of 6 wires each.

About 50,000 RPM max on the 1/2 inch neodymium ball, N42 strenght [sic] from K&J magnetics.

Here is my grok on this. The initial energy input goes into the mag fields of both coil and neoball, then it starts shuttling back and forth. This resonance acts to keep the ball spinning for a long time, much longer than friction would allow. There may also be an additional jolt of "radiant" energy coming into the system via the recurrent collapses of the mag fields on each cycle like a Bedini motor/charger. voila! you have a whacked out of control "lolo" neoball spinner!

checkout vortexspace.org excellent info and files, rodin coil folks are migrating there.
Aloha

Originally posted by Mary Rose
There is nothing abundantly clear about the feature on Mars if you have done research into the history of NASA and if you have an understanding of who runs this world and their modus operandi.

The following excerpt from Hancock, Graham (2010-08-11). The Mars Mystery: The Secret Connection Between Earth and the Red Planet (pp. 67-69). Random House, Inc. Kindle Edition boggles the mind:

Just hours later, Gerry Soffen, a spokesman for the Viking project, gave a briefing to the press about progress so far in NASA’s self-proclaimed search for life on Mars. Somehow an image of the newly discovered Face had reached him, and he showed it to the journalists. “Isn’t it peculiar what tricks of lighting and shadow can do,” he commented dismissively. “When we took a picture a few hours later it all went away. It was just a trick, just the way the light fell on it.”

Soon afterward JPL issued a press release making essentially the same points about the Face:

Photo Caption: This picture is one of many taken in the northern latitudes of Mars by the Viking 1 orbiter in search of a landing site for Viking 2. The picture shows eroded mesa-like landforms. The huge rock formation in the center, which resembles a human head, is formed by shadows giving the illusions of eyes, nose, and a mouth. The feature is 1.5 kilometers (1 mile) across, with the sun angle at approximately 20 degrees. The speckled appearance of the image is due to bit errors, emphasized by enlargement of the photo. The picture was taken on July 25 from a range of 1,873 kilometers (1,162 miles). Viking 2 will arrive in Mars orbit next Saturday [August 7] with a landing scheduled for early September.6

. . . In a way spokesman Gerry Soffen was perfectly correct to state that the image vanished within a few hours. This did not happen, however, because of tricks of light and shadow, but because night had fallen. No image of the Face was acquired a few hours later. Quite simply, the much-vaunted photograph that proves the Face is an illusion does not exist. So why, then, did NASA spread this strange story around?

Footnote 6 is Press release P-17384. (Source: NASA/Internet).

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

“Isn’t it peculiar what tricks of lighting and shadow can do,” he commented dismissively. “When we took a picture a few hours later it all went away. . . "

. . . This did not happen, however, because of tricks of light and shadow, but because night had fallen.[Emphasis mine.] No image of the Face was acquired a few hours later. Quite simply, the much-vaunted photograph that proves the Face is an illusion does not exist.

Originally posted by Mary Rose
Continuing my research regarding open-source R&D . . .

The Jack Scholze video posted below is fun to watch, I think. The description:

Uploaded by jackscholze on Nov 14, 2010

Neoball Pulse motor using a bifilar flat spiral coil. The coil is a single layer that spirals outward from the center, with a layer of masking tape between each wind. See "jiffycoils" videos for a good description of how to wind one of these.

Mine uses qty 2, #22 gauge solid copper magnet wires. About 100 spiral turns and 2.0 ohms resistance for each wire. Connected both coils in series, and it goes crazy with a +12 volts from a small battery, It easily exceeds 11,000 RPM with a good torque at all speeds. I've included the schematic and tried to explain it a bit. These spiral flat coils are remarkable, and can be seen some of Nikola Tesla's old patents going back to 1900 or so. I wish a lot of folks make these motors and experiment with the coils. My appreciation goes out to jiffycoil, lidmotor, jonnydavro, rwg42985 and others for their fine videos and sharing their knowldege. Checkout Google Rodin Coil group, and the new site vortexspace.org Aloha

reply to post by Mary Rose


I'm tired of videos made by wannabe experimentalists who are quite clueless about what they do in the lab.

Hard metal on glass will result in a very low friction coefficient. OK, so the magnet will spin for a while after you stopped supplying energy to it via a leaky toroidal coil. What is the big deal here?

Just sooo retarded.

Originally posted by buddhasystem
I'm tired of videos made by wannabe experimentalists . . .

They are the movers and shakers of this world, working in the spirit of cooperation. They're the salt of the earth in my book.

When this world finishes imploding financially, they'll be among those who will help bring in the new.

Originally posted by Mary Rose

Originally posted by buddhasystem
I'm tired of videos made by wannabe experimentalists . . .

They are the movers and shakers of this world, working in the spirit of cooperation. They're the salt of the earth in my book.

People who practice p!ss poor tradecraft are pathetic. Calling them "movers and shakers" is same. If you aren't capable of comprehending what's presented to you... Oh well.

When this world finishes imploding financially, they'll be among those who will help bring in the new.

People with no skills and no critical thinking are a burden to the society, not its saviors.

reply to post by buddhasystem


They will continue, no matter how much ridicule is foisted on them from people who feel threatened.

Originally posted by Mary Rose
reply to post by buddhasystem

 

They will continue, no matter how much ridicule is foisted on them from people who feel threatened.

It's rich of you to assume that I feel threatened by a bunch of buffoons.
Quite the contrary. I enjoy them as they are, for the comic effect. Cruel? Maybe. But "you reap what you sow".

reply to post by buddhasystem


More of the same: The fallacy of ridicule.

Originally posted by buddhasystem
Hard metal on glass will result in a very low friction coefficient. OK, so the magnet will spin for a while after you stopped supplying energy to it via a leaky toroidal coil. What is the big deal here?

From Jack Scholze:

1. I make no claims of over-unity or free energy. 2. The resonances observed show an extended spindown of the spinning neoball magnet beyond what you expect from simply resistance. The permanent mag field of the neoball interacts with the changing mag field of the coil to spin it up to high rpms. Then when the power is removed, the mag field energy appears to oscillate, and power the entire system for awhile. This field energy eventually dies away and the ball stops spinning. The good question is, does any other energy come into the system while this is occurring, like the Zeropoint energy, or the radiant energy, etc. Have to refer you to John Bedini's work for that, since I have no precise measuring devices. I can say that on some of the tests, there does seem to be extra energy, and it is not all the time. Sometimes, aligning the coil to the earth magfield, it just seems to go nuts and spin a long time. Tellurian currents? Radio waves? AC transmission lines? dont know. I admit that "going nuts" is not informative in any objective sense.