MAY 11th-EQ 5.3 magnitude SPAIN- Will Rome Get The "Big One" As Predicted Today?, page 13

privacy

Pages: << 10 11 12 13 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 60 times

reply posted on 18-5-2011 @ 02:02 AM by Determinator

reply to post by ArMaP

You're pulling my leg, right? You are actually saying, here on a top Conspiracy Site, that advanced technology would not be kept secret by various governments so as to have a weaponry advantage? Do you know anything at all about weapons history? Need I remind you of the atom bomb, for example?

reply posted on 18-5-2011 @ 03:25 AM by ArMaP

reply to post by Determinator

No, I'm not saying that, I'm saying that the discoveries behind those new technologies are not kept secret.

When something new is discovered, that discovery is not a secret, at least for the scientific community on that field. The possible application of that discovery in the military field is, obviously, kept secret, but the basis for that work is already known.

The only possible case in which such discovery would be kept secret is the case in which some scientists are already doing secret work about something and discover a new possibility that they have to keep secret because of the secrecy of the work that lead to the discovery.

Like you said, the work in the atomic bomb was kept secret, but the theory behind it was already known for some years.

reply posted on 18-5-2011 @ 03:11 PM by Determinator

reply to post by ArMaP

Understood. Your point is reasonable and well made. I just happen to be one of those crazy conspiracy theory types who believe a secret scenario, such as you describe but reject, is in fact possible. Not saying it is a fact. Just postulating that it is possible, theoretically. So what forum should I move my paranoid arse to where I can freely speculate and play with these ideas with fellow like-minded conspiracy oriented ATS members?

edit on 5/18/2011 by Determinator because: "Mistakes Were Made" (RR)

reply posted on 18-5-2011 @ 04:20 PM by Determinator

I still say that earthquakes can theoretically be created by HAARP. Watch this short video that discusses what happens when a billion watts of energy goes up into the atmosphere and then slams (rebounds) back down into the earth.

thetruthabout1111awakeningcode.blogspot.com...

reply posted on 18-5-2011 @ 05:30 PM by ArMaP

Originally posted by Determinator
So what forum should I move my paranoid arse to where I can freely speculate and play with these ideas with fellow like-minded conspiracy oriented ATS members?

Why, what's wrong with this one?

Don't feel less "at home" on this forum just because you found a less conspiracy-oriented member like myself.

reply posted on 18-5-2011 @ 06:01 PM by ArMaP

reply to post by Determinator

Some strange things on that video:

1 - Does HAARP really use a billion Watts of power? And is that power used or power emitted? If it's emitted, how much does HAARP consume? And where do they get all that power from? They would need a large power plant just for that.
2 - The largest nuclear power plant in Japan was not the "exact epicentre" of any earthquake, it was 15 miles away from the epicentre of the closest one.
3 - Mixing sound with radio waves is never a good sign, they are completely different things with completely different effects on things.
4 - Has anyone ever explained how is it supposed that a fixed antenna array can be pointed to the other side of the planet with a precision of a few kilometres?

reply posted on 19-5-2011 @ 02:50 AM by Determinator

reply to post by ArMaP

Yes, actually, these things have been explained. But would you buy it? Your mind seems to be made up.

But just in case it isn't - Please go to this link (oh, and here is a sample - And you will see I must correct myself - HAARP is actually 3 gigawatts of power - That's actually 3 billion watts, not 1 Billion, as previously mentioned.

"For those that think the HAARP array network is just a research program, think again: Look at this short demonstration of of what 1000 watts of microwave energy can produce from a grape cut in half (Movie 2). Multiply this effect by 3 million times as HAARP is 3 gigawatts of power (3 billion watts) now you just need a grape large enough for the array to feed from; see video of Large Artificial Electric Flame (LAEF) this sample pales to the (MAEF & EAEF) massive and extreme versions. Note to adversaries of the United States and recent saber rattling; you may not want to provoke this Kodiak Bear with a stick."

www.superforce.com...

edit on 5/19/2011 by Determinator because: added link

reply posted on 19-5-2011 @ 02:55 AM by Determinator

reply to post by ArMaP

What on earth are you doing here, then? Isn't that the fun of it, going wild with creative conspiracy theorizing?

I seriously am happy to share what I have been learning about H.A.A.R.P. I am not trying to take the cheap and easy way out, hanging onto the coat-tails of Icke and the like. I am actually trying to look at this through the lens of reason, science, and rationality. However, a critical factor in my whimsical theorizing is the idea that it may be possible to keep some advanced technological know-how secret. Are you willing to go there with me, even for a moment? Also, you would need be willing to embrace playful ideas associated with Quantum Physics and String Theory.

And actually, you're kind of growing on me, so I hope that we can continue on, even if in a bit of a stumbling fashion.

Reminds me of David Bohm's wonderful work on integrative communication - He wrote about how two or more people might strive toward not becoming polarized by "splits" in thinking and ideology when having heated discussions - but instead to embrace multiple viewpoints, if only for a moment, to better understand the 'Other'...

reply posted on 19-5-2011 @ 05:44 PM by ArMaP

Originally posted by Determinator
Yes, actually, these things have been explained. But would you buy it? Your mind seems to be made up.

I am not "buying" anything, but my mind is still under construction.

But just in case it isn't - Please go to this link (oh, and here is a sample - And you will see I must correct myself - HAARP is actually 3 gigawatts of power - That's actually 3 billion watts, not 1 Billion, as previously mentioned.

What's the source for that information? I find it strange that they have a power plant big enough to produce all that power.

"For those that think the HAARP array network is just a research program, think again: Look at this short demonstration of of what 1000 watts of microwave energy can produce from a grape cut in half (Movie 2).

There's a big difference between a closed area like an oven with microwaves being emitted inside it and an open space of many kilometres. They compared the power used by the microwave oven and HAARP, but they didn't compare the volume of air affected by it, and I think the volume of the oven multiplied by 3 millions is smaller than the area affected by HAARP.

reply posted on 19-5-2011 @ 05:57 PM by ArMaP

Originally posted by Determinator
What on earth are you doing here, then? Isn't that the fun of it, going wild with creative conspiracy theorizing?

People with different points of view may get their fun from different things. For me, that do not have a good imagination, part of the fun is in seeing how other people think, and point to them that there are things that are probably not considering in their thought process.

A conspiracy theory should be subjected to the same scrutiny as any other theory, and not be accepted just because it goes against mainstream science or TPTB. Unfortunately, many people act in a way that makes me think that they only follow those theories because it's "fashionable".

However, a critical factor in my whimsical theorizing is the idea that it may be possible to keep some advanced technological know-how secret. Are you willing to go there with me, even for a moment? Also, you would need be willing to embrace playful ideas associated with Quantum Physics and String Theory.

Sure, why not? After all, this is a discussion forum, what better place could we get to discuss topics like this?

He wrote about how two or more people might strive toward not becoming polarized by "splits" in thinking and ideology when having heated discussions - but instead to embrace multiple viewpoints, if only for a moment, to better understand the 'Other'...

I agree, that's part of the reason for half (or more) of the "fights" in forums like this, people do not understand (apparently) that the only of knowing if we are right is by knowing all other possible points of view, and the better way of doing is by putting ourselves in the position of people that have opposing ideas.

Pages: << 10 11 12 13 >> ^^TOP^^