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.

 

Remote Viewers Predict Catastrophic Meteor Impact Before 2013

page: 42
56
<< 39  40  41    43  44  45 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 16 2012 @ 10:37 AM
link   
well since a poster here will not do his job I will

I went twitting




kent walls ‏@Snowbroods_Area
@NASA me and few friends at a website have been having a debate over objects in space (asteroids, comets, moons, exct...)


and



kent walls ‏@Snowbroods_Area
@NASA the question that will solve our debate was NASA's detection system. What areas does it cover?


and




kent walls ‏@Snowbroods_Area
@NASA does this include any billiard ball type effects from a space object hitting say the asteroid belt or minor moons?


and



kent walls ‏@Snowbroods_Area
@NASA what are the blind spots of the detection system?


and



kent walls ‏@Snowbroods_Area
@NASA What equipment is used to build this protection net for the human race?



most organizations will respond with answers to public information

Understand this means there will be more focused question to come out. I am willing to be that there are a few blind spots in the system....




posted on Jun, 16 2012 @ 11:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by stereologist
That is a ridiculous unfounded opinion on your part. It is as unfounded as belief in RV.


Nope you offer not even a claim of training. It is only ridiculous because it upsets your applecart.

Houdini had training as a Magician which made him uniquely qualified to debunk. You are a keyboard jockey at best.



Another falsehood. I ask about evidence to support RV and the claims of the OP. I am not discussing you or myself or neuroscience or the big bang or whatever off topic subject you bring into the thread.


You asked for proof that ANY Remote viewer could be based in science. Do not complain because a synthesis is over your head.

A modern car is not built on one experiments results and working equations (if you do not get that go back to college before you post anything negative on CRV)

You are discussing these things if you want to prove you know what your talking about, otherwise you have no clue




That is an out and out bald faced lie.


You said so yourself in an earlier post

Again why is that a lie yet you say nothing about being accused of being a fraud. Sounds like more cherry picking on your part



Learn a little about the scientific method. Learn that the goal is to find objective evidence, not subjective evidence.
Do you have any evidence for this silly parlor game called RV? Where is the evidence that it works?

Any discussion about me simply shows that your claims are so failed and so bad that you have to resort to personal attacks.


LOL...

I asked for paperwork or websites with the paperwork.

You know something you said wasnt science is science?

Maybe the paragraph form is required for you. I am asking you the experiments you have ran or the experiments a real scientist has ran. With all due respect, the copy of the experiments observations and the conclusions drawn from the conclusions.

A copy of the experiments set up would not hurt your case at all. (BTW)

I asked you for these because you stated that CRV was not a science. I am asking you for the proof in the form you should have or have access to.

As for personal attacks, not a single thing I stated is a personal attack. I reported an earlier three part post MYSELF in case it was.

Let me explain something to you
a personal attack involves
say that hair on you ear is disgusting
your an idiot for X
you smell funny
hey you mother X

Asking for
qualifications
copy of your proof it is a psuedo science

most people will say I work or have worked at X

I respectfully feel you should take a few classes on astro physics it will open your eyes to a lot more possibilities.

I am more curious over the continued responses over subjects related to astrophysics.

Are you OK... sounds like someone burned you on the subject and you are unfairly judging all people with the same paintbrush.

I will share a secret with and a few other people...

About 20% of the human race falls under that brush
another 16.6 % comes close

the rest, well you are being a beast to for no reason..

however again I will buy drinks if Dames is right and an Ellie hits earth next year


he is in that percentage of 36.6%



posted on Jun, 16 2012 @ 01:19 PM
link   
reply to post by ripcontrol
 



Nope you offer not even a claim of training. It is only ridiculous because it upsets your applecart.

Houdini had training as a Magician which made him uniquely qualified to debunk. You are a keyboard jockey at best.

Please stop the personal attacks or I will report your posts.


You asked for proof that ANY Remote viewer could be based in science. Do not complain because a synthesis is over your head.

Please off some evidence instead of your continued personal attacks.


Maybe the paragraph form is required for you. I am asking you the experiments you have ran or the experiments a real scientist has ran. With all due respect, the copy of the experiments observations and the conclusions drawn from the conclusions.

A copy of the experiments set up would not hurt your case at all. (BTW)

Please offer some evidence for this parlor game called RV? Where is there anything that supports it as being in any way scientific?


I asked you for these because you stated that CRV was not a science. I am asking you for the proof in the form you should have or have access to.

Please offer anything to support your contention that RV is science based.


As for personal attacks, not a single thing I stated is a personal attack. I reported an earlier three part post MYSELF in case it was.

Let me explain something to you
a personal attack involves
say that hair on you ear is disgusting
your an idiot for X
you smell funny
hey you mother X

Just as your claims that you were not soliciting personal information was wrong so is your claim that name calling is not a personal attack.

Neither you or I are of concern. The issue is RV.


I respectfully feel you should take a few classes on astro physics it will open your eyes to a lot more possibilities.

I am more curious over the continued responses over subjects related to astrophysics.

Are you OK... sounds like someone burned you on the subject and you are unfairly judging all people with the same paintbrush.

I have no idea what your confusion is on this matter and I don't care.

The issue is RV and providing support for it.

At this point it is obvious you have nothing to offer. I am not surprised. RV is a silly parlor game just like the Ouija board.



posted on Jun, 16 2012 @ 01:23 PM
link   
reply to post by ripcontrol
 



Again you have been asked for your quals and none given


Also you have been asked a series of questions if you believe in the existence in the human nervous system . Among other things.

Since you cried foul on the quals we went down a variety of items. If you cant see the connection it is not my problem.

I keep giving you chance after chance to prove you are not trolling. So far I see nothing but fuzzy hair

I then aided you in your argument against the very same thing we are disagreeing on.


So far you are behaving like a fraud....


Please provide something that shows RV works. You continued blathering about off topic subjects does nothing to support RV.


BTW, you asked for proof... I am kinda curious...
Do you not believe in the big bang
Do you not believe in all the materials I named?

The issue is RV.


I have reviewed your other threads and I see the same trolling the whole time... it is a huge problem for me

The issue is RV.


I CALL

where is the proof it does not work
1)the experiment observations
2)the conclusions

if this makes no sense do not claim science or psuedo science as a basis for your trolling

Where is there any evidence that this silly parlor game called RV works?

The onus is not to prove a universal negative. The burden is to show that RV works.



posted on Jun, 16 2012 @ 01:26 PM
link   
reply to post by uesvaje
 



stereologist, you glossed over the Army ESP confirming publication from peer reviewed medical/biology Springer journal Molecular and Cellular Biochemistry didn't you?

A positive study by/from the military makes pseudosceptics and debunkers uncomfortable it seems.

There are enough evidence to say that RV, ESP, qi, biofield, bioenergy, biophysics, quantum biology, bioelectromagnetism works and exist, even if constrained by limitations.

But the fact is it can't be denied anymore by pseudosceptics and debunkers. It can be argued to death in academia, but it has proved some mechanism within the human body not fully understood yet, makes it happen.

It's a dilemma you people with that type of thinking need to resolve and get over it.

I did gloss over the abstract and it certainly does not show that ESP works. Did you read the paper? I will soon. In the mean time you might want to read it as well and be read to discuss the paper in detail.

The problem here is that there is no evidence for ESP or psi or whatever you want to call it is real. I'll get back to you shortly.



posted on Jun, 16 2012 @ 07:15 PM
link   
reply to post by stereologist
 


I have to say I find you hilarious completely. You have made such entertaining reading. it is like boohbah' with your child as they watch it for the first time.

What a beautiful attempt to corner me into a response.

epic fail...



I have already reported my own post.



quite literally

(I do not have to resort trying to remove a poster or post when I respectfully disagree with someone)
(please note I have tried to engage you in alternative theories as to why it works)

Again with the threats... Why?
(You make it sound like if I do not stop disagreeing with you , you will have me thrown off ATS)



You asked for scientific proof

Controlled Remote Viewing is a Synthesis of various discoveries
Synthesis



refers to a combination of two or more entities that together form something new; alternately, it refers to the creating of something by artificial means.


I offered the basis for what it works on

all you could respond
1)The mean man responded to his own post
2)well they are not science like RV


you being the unqualified expert used a strawman argument to dodge what discoveries are involved.

Again what are your qualifications? so far none

like Dames you make claims with no basis in reality

On this singular point we agree

I tired to build a conversation with you on this basis and all I got was troll hate

I noticed you made no response to the attempt to contact NASA...

After all your biggest motivation at ATS seems to be as disbeliever of all thing related extra planetary ... yet no contact with NASA....

Do you believe the earth is round?



posted on Jun, 16 2012 @ 07:27 PM
link   
reply to post by stereologist
 




I did gloss over the abstract and it certainly does not show that ESP works. Did you read the paper? I will soon. In the mean time you might want to read it as well and be read to discuss the paper in detail.



thank you for admitting you just glossed over the material

It takes a big minded person to admit they were wrong and did not give the subject matters involved a full reading

After all here at ATS we deny ignorance by reading the material first. Especially before we try and say something says something. It is the equivalent of saying I read a book by reading the outline and the summary in the back.

I'll give you that I did not think you had it in you to admit you where wrong..WOW

star for you

it takes a grown up to admit they where wrong....

___________________________________________________________________


as for the NASA part I have not gotten a response

I am thinking of emailing NASA directly instead of trying tweets

Now that you admit you did something wrong maybe we can work together with other members of ATS and get to the bottom of this thread

The first question is

IS it actually possible for an asteroid to sneak pass the scanning capabilities of NASA and other countries?

_____________________________________________________________


Good job admitting you where completely wrong and apologizing for what you did...

kudos to you



posted on Jun, 16 2012 @ 11:04 PM
link   
reply to post by ripcontrol
 



Again with the threats... Why?
(You make it sound like if I do not stop disagreeing with you , you will have me thrown off ATS)

I am simply asking for you to stop your cherlish behavior.


You asked for scientific proof

Controlled Remote Viewing is a Synthesis of various discoveries

Your link has nothing whatsoever to do with RV.


I tired to build a conversation with you on this basis and all I got was troll hate

I have made no statements about you. I am simply stating that there is no basis for the claims that RV is in any way scientific or that it works.


I noticed you made no response to the attempt to contact NASA...

I am not interested in any off topic issues. The issue is RV. It's a parlor game for the self deluded.

Please provide anything about RV that substantiates it. So far nothing has been offered.



posted on Jun, 16 2012 @ 11:07 PM
link   
reply to post by ripcontrol
 



I'll give you that I did not think you had it in you to admit you where wrong..WOW

You've told another lie. I never stated I was wrong. I stated I glossed over the material.


IS it actually possible for an asteroid to sneak pass the scanning capabilities of NASA and other countries?

This has no bearing on the thread. The issue is whether or not a silly parlor game called RV can make predictions.


Good job admitting you where completely wrong and apologizing for what you did... /quote]
Lying several times in a row seems to fit in with the fairy tales told by RVers. That is not what I stated.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 02:40 AM
link   
reply to post by stereologist
 


just so I understand this

NASA's ability (or another countries) to scan the solar system for planetary objects has nothing to do with this thread...

Thread title


Remote Viewers Predict Catastrophic Meteor Impact Before 2013


You know I'll just wait for you to admit you were wrong AGAIN,

So you do not like the new direction of the thread. Now is NASA on your "psuedo-science" hit-list.


PS for the rest of our conversation on the subject I have to insist upon some form of Quals..

Either demonstrate them or be quiet. Most people so far recognize you as a fraud. I have to demand your quals again as I have so far.

You have demonstrated no knowledge of science
You have demonstrated no knowledge of the scientific method
You have refused to provide evidence of experimental testing, observations, and conclusions
You have refused to acknowledged basic discoveries as part of science

I am giving you a chance to prove your point. I have you given you multiple hints in the threads on how to make your arguments . So far you have done none.

I asked you for evidence of you views,
do you have photographs?



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 07:29 AM
link   
reply to post by ripcontrol
 



NASA's ability (or another countries) to scan the solar system for planetary objects has nothing to do with this thread...

If you think that NASA has anything to do with RV then please post it instead of posting nothing. Posturing simply makes you look bad. Provide content. Your repeatedly providing posts of no content.


I am giving you a chance to prove your point. I have you given you multiple hints in the threads on how to make your arguments . So far you have done none.

The matter is RV and its a farce. It does not matter who you or I are. That makes no difference on the subject of RV.

Does RV work? There is no evidence for it. I have asked for evidence and nothing has been provided other than an old report by a single person. That person, Utts, differs with the posters in this thread. She clearly stated that practice and training have little to effect on RV.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 07:31 AM
link   
reply to post by uesvaje
 


You posted a link to an article and the abstract. Have you read the article? I have not received my copy yet, but was wondering what the form of bioenergy was mentioned in the article. Could you please let me know.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 09:21 AM
link   
reply to post by stereologist



Provide content

 

you know, a lot of posters seem to ask you to do the very same, mostly in the 2012 forum.

Calling Malarkey repeatedly over and again isnt really debunking.

I really do call Crappola on all quantum science but just because I do doesnt mean even Trigonometry is Fake Math.

Thanks one more time for making this thread a success and still relevant to daily posting



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 09:50 AM
link   
reply to post by one4all



In the bible they talk about humans as if they are gods,and angels,but the reality to me is that at some time in the past a meteor hit earth and caused a global flood of biblical proportions,

 


looking at Sumerian tablet text it seems the Flood happened long before Modern Man. If it was directed by your "Almighty" it would have been to remove the previous Man from the Earth. Hence a new earth.

About Scripture......Noah and Abraham are the same guy........now how could there be a flood in the era of Abraham ? where is scripture to show Abraham was Noah? is it only coincidence that they both have spouses and children of the same names? The fact that things dont make sense in the "Good Book" is tale of a Tale in its own right



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 10:11 AM
link   
reply to post by rebellender
 


As I told you before there is no need to provide a reference to those that do not provide a reference for their claims.

In this thread the onus is on the OP and its supports to support RV. Have they? No.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 10:25 AM
link   
reply to post by stereologist
 

Yes I suppose that the thought of waking tomorrow is Quantum Thought, but I would have to prove tomorrow exists, now since I can't do that, what ever shall I do. To make or not make plans tomorrow.

This opens a lot of road for thought, a host of things now come into play. Should I for instance pay car insurance in advance.
Opening the Frig for a breakfast meal is quite a quantum thought, but how do I know there will be a tomorrow.

Registering to Vote brings a great deal of quantum thought that there will be life as we know it November 6th and ever more quantum thought in January.

I cannot prove tomorrow will come.
Can you prove RV is bogus.

Quantum Assumption


Guess this means the jury is still out on all accounts



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 10:33 AM
link   
Hey guys/gals/hybrids/aliens

Are there any remote viewers involved in this thread?

Out of curiosity and for the sake of debate, I would like to put some RV to a test drive. I will pick a target and we can see if a viewer can pick up on it. I can U2U the object to someone else for verification.

Instead of debating whether or not someone is a known charlatan, fraud etc..... Why don't we see if we can get some tangible results?



 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 12:30 PM
link   
reply to post by stereologist
 


again with the failed attempts at posturing for superiority. Be good boy and sit down. You admitted you have not read the material on the subject.

I want to make sure I have this right

You are claiming nothing in NASA has any bearing what so ever on this thread.

even though it involves objects in space


As for RV as a science, actually the honor of defending one positions goes to the person that claimed it first. You claimed it was a psuedo-science so where is your proof.

Again you where big enough to admit you where wrong earlier. Now you state it is a psuedo science because you said it was a psuedo science.

We are waiting on that little thing called evidence....


BTW, thank you for the free laughs. So far you have made everyone who I share your post with laugh. A friend of mine actually almost peed himself with laughter.

______________________________

@everyone but stereo
(you said it has nothing to do with the very title and kill shot theory)
(and NASA has nothing to do with space)


waiting still to see if NASA tweets back in the meantime does anyone have questions based on asteroid, comet, or gravitational anomalies that would fit in this thread

I am hoping they will be able to tell us ALL if there is a blindspot in the monitoring of space in regards to a potential killshot.

My feeling we will actually be told we can see it but we might not be able to do anything about it...

I am going to ask if anything is scheduled for 2013



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 12:39 PM
link   
reply to post by rebellender
 



I cannot prove tomorrow will come.
Can you prove RV is bogus.

The onus is on the proponents of RV.

Unlike concept of tomorrow which have come millions of times already in the history of the Earth, there are apparently no examples to support RV or than the anecdotal stories from the believers. These issues are hardly in the same camp.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 12:47 PM
link   
reply to post by ripcontrol
 



again with the failed attempts at posturing for superiority. Be good boy and sit down. You admitted you have not read the material on the subject.

You lie again. I see a pattern forming.


You are claiming nothing in NASA has any bearing what so ever on this thread.

even though it involves objects in space

Please show anything at all that NASA is involved in RV.


As for RV as a science, actually the honor of defending one positions goes to the person that claimed it first. You claimed it was a psuedo-science so where is your proof.

Please reread the thread and see that is a falsehood. The first claim that it was science comes from AlchemicalMonocular.


Again you where big enough to admit you where wrong earlier. Now you state it is a psuedo science because you said it was a psuedo science.

Repeating lies does not change the fact that you are telling lies.


BTW, thank you for the free laughs. So far you have made everyone who I share your post with laugh. A friend of mine actually almost peed himself with laughter.

It's funny for me too to hear about your friend's childish behavior. Thanks for sharing that.


(you said it has nothing to do with the very title and kill shot theory)
(and NASA has nothing to do with space)

Is this is what RV is all about. Is it about telling lies? Is it about misrepresentation? That is what you are doing more and more.

It certainly seems that there is no evidence for the parlor game called RV.

The kill shot begins with the claim that one of the shuttles would be brought down by meteorites. Never happened. It is another in a long line of whopping failures by Ed Dames.







 
56
<< 39  40  41    43  44  45 >>

log in

join