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.
... affected by the object behind the Elenin object.
The efforts to debunk these struck me as amateurish and ludicrous and I was just voicing my frustration with those attempts.
Originally posted by OccamAssassin
This is a sham.
I admit I only flicked through the first half of this hypothesis, but the facts were so poorly laid out I had to stop reading to combat an onset of nausea.
For starters the figures given for 'equatorial diameter' and 'mass' are given in a precise form yet the density is unknown. WTF?
Surely, if the author knew so much about the physical attributes, then no doubt that the simple mathematical calculations required to calculate the density should have been a 'walk in the park'.
Secondly, gravity is actually magnetism? OK then, if the author is so sure that gravity is a farce and what we see as attractive masses can only be attributed to magnetism, then why doesn't plastic, non-ferrous ceramic, etc, float?
I could keep going...but what's the point.
Epic failedit on 27/7/2011 by OccamAssassin because: (no reason given)
It is obvious to me that many of you did not really read this article.
Are there a few dubious statements or guesstimated calculations? YES! Does that make the entire paper irrelevant? NO!
Electric Universe theory is face stomping preconceived theories and laws left and right. Laws and theories that have been in place for decades.
It just plain makes sense!
The problem with science these days is that it's funded by grant. If you argue for something that is politically or socially inconvenient, you simply don't get research funds
Anyone that funds their own research is usually cast aside and labeled as a pseudo-scientist. This is the same thing that happens in our medical community today.
That said, I have no doubt there are a few key people in the science community, and certainly in NASA, that have realized for quite a while now that our model of the universe is seriously flawed.
"poorly laid out" "facts" are still facts, just in a layout that does not conform to your standards.
Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by KSprepared
I think NASA really is waking up to the electric universe.
Can you tell me anyone at NASA that believes in the theory? Can you show me where NASA is using that idea? Can you show me any publications that support this theory?
I think you are too sure of you, we' ll see in time, your attitude is irresponsible !
and it seems cosmologists are just now starting to seriously look at Electric Universe for answers.