Originally posted by Spruk
reply to post by FreedomCommander
Oh there is a number of articles/videos showing him eating/drinking plutonium. I seem to be having issues today converying my points, so please bear with me. My major issue with that is the video looks like its from a camera around 70s-80s origin, so there is no way except for taking someones word for it.
And i know this isnt the crux of your discussion points it is from my standpoint wrong that running around with radioactive U235 is an awesome idea, even in small doses (Again medically speaking)
Although the data on which to establish oral and inhalation acute LD50 for uranium in humans are sparse, they are adequate to conclude that the LD50 for oral intake of soluble uranium compounds exceeds several grams of uranium
It is suggested that 5 g be provisionally considered the acute oral LD50 for uranium in humans.
The water he went swimming in apparently wasn't that hot.
Originally posted by Spruk
As for the swimming part, not going to get into that, as i only have a limited understanding of a fission reactor, but i can only assume the cooling pools would be freaking hot.
I don't think the PhD he never got in soil chemistry qualifies him as a nuclear physicist, nor does being a buyer of yellow cake.
Winsor: Oh, I did things like work on a Ph.D. in soil chemistry, at the University of Wisconsin, and never finished it, under Dr. Emil Truog.
I’m an expert in plutonium chemistry. I was “Mister Plutonium” for the General Electric Company.
But no—you don’t put any fancy letters after my name.
Martin: That’s fine with me. I understand that philosophy.
Winsor: I’m a plutonium chemist. I learned it through the school of hard knocks.
There’s not a university in the country that would even recognize the work that I’ve done. ...
I used to be the uranium ore buying manager for General Electric, at Naturita, Colorado, 25 years ago. My business was to buy uranium “yellow-cake” from the miners.
Originally posted by FreedomCommander
reply to post by swan001
I thought I knew everything, quarks, neutrinos, the whole lot, that was until I began to read some free energy generator books for the heck of it.
I learned how to stop a gun from firing from over a mile away and w/o touching the gun or any ballistic/explosive weaponry.
I have learned what the planet's structure really is and that if it was a solid ball, we wouldn't be here, the compass wouldn't work, and there will be no land formations.
I would be interested to know what gave you that impression, because statements like this, and many others, give me exactly the opposite impression:
Originally posted by swan001
you are giving me the impression that your theory actually have some solid roots.
But if your looking for a experiment, sorry I don't have one like that to prove that the proton has at least 1836 electrons to cover it."
I have learned the hoaxes that were done such as the lunar landing, four color theorem, and why some people have a opposition towards astrology.
This was done and was disproven, you need at least 6 colors to make a map. Two college students did it and they had only the help of a computer and spent over 1000 hours on it. They must of been so angry when they found that they couldn't prove the theory as a fact.
I mean, I don't accept theory as law, yet they did. In fact, the entire scientific community did. They must of denied it to save face.
A mathematician, A.L. Kitselman published a pamphlet about two decades ago entitled, "Hello Stupid". He ridicules nineteenth century mathematician George Cantor for some of the outrageous conclusions derived from his theory of transfinite numbers. This same booklet describes a phenomenon known as the Biefeld-Brown effect which physicists continue to ignore, since it is damaging to current theories and they are at a loss to explain it.
There is a mathematical blooper that centers around the famous four-color theorem which has been stumping mathematicians for the past 140 years.
This theorem states that four colors are sufficient to color any map on a plane surface, so that no two adjacent regions are the same color. The opinion among mathematicians is that this conjecture is valid, since no one has ever been able to disprove it by devising a map that requires more than four colors. It has been disturbing to the mathematical world that no one has come forward with acceptable proof of that theory until recently.
A simple proof did emerge: let a map be drawn so that, by necessity, four different colors lie along a common border, and the problem is easily solved. It is then only necessary to surround this border with another region which obviously requires the fifth color. This is the approach that was employed. Any complex map with a myriad of regions requires four colors, and in fact, each of the four colors will appear many times.
Now consider a map with an infinitude of regions of all sizes and shapes, and that this map is colored in the most efficient manner possible. Also assume that by some miracle, only four colors were used. This means that each of the four different colors will appear a near infinite number of times. A line is now drawn through this map separating it into two parts. It can be drawn in any number of ways and can even be a closed curve. This line will necessarily cut through regions of four different colors. Now there are two different maps, each of which has been colored in the most efficient manner, with four different colors along a common border. Either one of these maps can be surrounded with another region requiring the fifth color.
One might argue that the map can be recolored by first coloring the regions along the border, using only three colors in this process. The regions along the border can indeed be three colored, but this immediately creates a new problem. This has so restricted the coloring of the inner regions that a fifth color soon becomes mandatory and possibly even a sixth color. By the recoloring process, the map as a whole cannot be colored in a more economical manner than it was before.
Two mathematicians, Kenneth Appel and Wolfgang Haken, at the University of Illinois were striving to prove this theorem. Their work was considered to be of sufficient importance and so they were granted unlimited use of one of the most sophisticated computers in the country. After years of hard work and 1600 hours of computer use, they finally announced a successful conclusion to the project. The October 1977 issue of Scientific American featured an article about this milestone in the history of mathematics. This article included a complex map of hundreds of regions successfully four-colored to illustrate the validity of the theorem. Each of four different colors appeared along the outline of the map a minimum of 12 times, thereby making it a five-color map with the addition of the surrounding region.
Appel, Kenneth; Wolfgang, Haken. "The solution of the FourColor map Problem," Scientific American, October 1977, pp. 108-121.