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.
NASA's involvement in this thread is apparent to anyone with a first grade education. They can see if the prediction is any way feasible. The prediction is not feasible out of the gate if NASA has no blind spots and is watching the whole system. Their models should eliminate the possibility of this prediction being true or leave room for its existence. My daughter can see why cant this guy. He has to be in highschool.
Duh!!! NASA has the webcams out in space, like, they should be watching to see if asteroids are coming. Any *snip for rudeness* can see that. Its like a math word problem... This psychic stuff is not part of the initial proof to disprove the prediction. It has to be possible first. DUH!!!
20yrs of DOD work and mega budget. Uncle Sam dont spend millions of dollars on "useless crap for christmas".
I have to say after evaluation of the OP Content and 42 pages that you are not qualified to say "NAY".
Originally posted by rebellender
reply to post by stereologist
Ok! so you have stated your case then about RV and so that others are not intimidated by you can you let others that wish to converse the issues of the OP unabated?
That means that you are very confident in you OPINION, so secure that you have no need to heckle or harass others.
So what is clear to me is you Call Crap. We get it. Totally.
again it the interest of the OP can others discuss the idea of the OP without your harassment and intimidation?
Remote Viewers Predict Catastrophic Meteor Impact Before 2013
the biggest part is not producing quals.
Third he denied NASA had any part of this thread. Even though part of their job is stellar observation. They could end the whole discussion on this thread with a set of words. Yet he claimed they have nothing to do with this thread.
forth he admits to not reading the material that was provided- somehow an abstract was all it took to dismiss something.
Fifth he claims evidence he refuses to provide. All science industry is based on replication of experiments by independent parties.
I advise running the experiments yourself.
Please note unlike Stereo I learned note group people together in clicks. Otherwise I would have a much lower opinion of skeptics and there skills. Thankfully my friends are not at the, kindergarten people of Walmart level of skeptics.
The main thing is he is refreshing as he made them laugh so hard at his naivety.
I outlined my experiments I have ran for them. They called them interesting and quite a bit of progress for me. (I might now qualify for a high school science fair)
Instead of not answering, have something to say on the topic.
I say your debunking needs work. I have posted a number of incidents on the discoveries behind the subject and yet you keep going off on rants. With all these off topic responses coming from you its hard to tell what your debunking is based on.
Do not insult my friends they are made of better stuff then you! Look closely at what was said. They never once have said they believe in the material.
I do not call you an idiot, mark, or moron so please refrain from said behavior.
As for the NASA material, I noticed you backed down and then tried to redirect.
As for evidence, it was provided. You ignored it, not my problem.
Complaining about evidence ad nauseam yet providing none for multiple post is part of your pattern
Let us go back to this thing called the Scientific Method
Where are the Observations
Where Are the conclusions
You state they are the basis of your claim. You said scientific evidence proves Remote Viewing is a fraud.
Of course you admitted another mistake YOU made earlier as well.
What was it?
not reading something and only browsing the abstract....
Of note Have you even contacted NASA to prove Dames prediction is impossible?