Resonance – Beings of Frequency (Documentary)

reply to post by john_bmth


Have you ever thought, just maybe, Science cannot explain everything? Secondly, it's a bit ridiculous that you are the only one who is allowed to accept or reject evidence. It's even more ironic you are doing the same thing you are accusing us of; rejecting of uncomfortable material. Thirdly, drop the indignance for being called out on your disrespectful attitude. You started the discussion off on the wrong foot by calling people childish names.

reply to post by VeritasAequitas


He prefers making assumptions and provoking people over asking questions and learning, so I'm leaving it alone. Thanks for the support though. As it so happens, science prove us right. More and more, they are finding frequencies in unusual places. It's delightful.

Originally posted by VeritasAequitas
reply to post by john_bmth

 

1) Have you ever thought, just maybe, Science cannot explain everything?
2) Secondly, it's a bit ridiculous that you are the only one who is allowed to accept or reject evidence.
3) It's even more ironic you are doing the same thing you are accusing us of; rejecting of uncomfortable material.
4) Thirdly, drop the indignance for being called out on your disrespectful attitude.
5) You started the discussion off on the wrong foot by calling people childish names.

1) You have still yet to support anything you have said with science. Your incorrect assertions have been directly refuted with science. Its woefully weak to try and hide behind the "science can't explain everything therefore woo hoo" fallacy.

2) You haven't challenged ANYTHING I have said directly. That would be s good starting point, would it not?

3) It's uncomfortable because it's ignorant and flat out wrong, as has been demonstrated.

4) Disrespectful? You are an intellectually dishonest hypocrite.

5) Please quote exactly where I have called you or anyone else names. Otherwise, you are a liar.

But the pattern persists. Still no substance, still no addressing of rebuttals. Still no evidence for baseless and incorrect assertions.

reply to post by AfterInfinity


Provoking people to back up their claims with evidence? How dastardly!

Originally posted by wujotvowujotvowujotvo
HAARP generates gravity waves, what you are stuck with is continuing to refer to radio waves while the gravity waves generated by those same radio waves are the physical mechanism in discussion.

I think you're looking for that thread over....there. Yes, that's the one. The one where you stated that Gossard was referring to radio waves. Then got caught out when it was atmospheric updrafts. That's why we ignored you after that. Oh, and if you re-read, you'll see I explained what a gravity wave was to you, and didn't debate that HAARP did in fact cause displacement of the ionosphere. Now, go back to that thread and post there, where it's relevant. I'll continue to ignore you though. Bye now.

reply to post by john_bmth


Here's your evidence, since you missed it the first time around.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

If you want any more, you'll have to do your own research. Start with the matters discussed in the claims presented in that thread. If you want to learn, then work for it. Don't ask me to spoon feed you.

Originally posted by VeritasAequitas

For instance though; my neighbor has a child with a toy xylophone. There are 7 keys on it, each one being represented by ROYGBIV. So is that a coincidence?

YES. There's nothing to say they couldn't have made them all shades of blue. Or alternating red and green stripes. The sound would have been the same.

Go look up "toy xylophone" on google, hit "image" and behold! There are any number of color-bar combinations. Sometimes the longest bar is one color, sometimes another, because the designer of the toy arbitrarily assigned colors to them. It's analogous to what happened with the gadget you posted. All the guy's doing is getting an encoded color number and doing a table lookup to get a sound frequency value to cram into the timer's modulus register. The table assignments were popped out of his butt, to sound nice and stay inside a range the user would find audible.

And eight tone scales are not the only scales there are. The number of notes and the intervals between notes vary between music types and cultures. A lot of them are arranged around octave relationships because of how your ears are designed.

reply to post by AfterInfinity

Here's a crazy thought: how about you post evidence for the baseless and incorrect claims I have directly challenged you on? How about you directly address any of the rebuttals I have made to your baseless claims? But let's face it, that's not gonna happen now, is it. I think we're done here. Goodnight.

reply to post by john_bmth


I forgot what the question was. Care to repeat it?

reply to post by john_bmth


Woo woo's? Or did you forget?

reply to post by VeritasAequitas


If you sincerely believe that calling something so crushingly and demonstratably wrong "woo hoo" is somehow an insult to someone then I'm not sure a public forum is the best outlet for your ignorance. But yet again, trust you to ignore the rest of my post and focus on something that is demonstrably false (that I called anyone names, clearly if you're not a liar then you must struggle with reading comprehension) instead of directly addressing any challenges to baseless and incorrect assertions you have made. As with AfterInfinity, you're clearly not going to substantiate anything you have said or respond to my rebuttals so I think we're done here. This off-topic wild goose chase ends here. Goodnight.

reply to post by john_bmth

As with AfterInfinity, you're clearly not going to substantiate anything you have said or respond to my rebuttals so I think we're done here. This off-topic wild goose chase ends here. Goodnight.

You already said that. I'm still waiting for you to demonstrate your ability to exercise manners and all that good stuff.

reply to post by john_bmth


You are ostracizing people based on what they believe. The clearly childish and immature "woo-woo" goading just emanates blatant disrespect.

Originally posted by VeritasAequitas
reply to post by john_bmth

 

You are ostracizing people based on what they believe. The clearly childish and immature "woo-woo" goading just emanates blatant disrespect.

Nobody respects my beliefs in flying spaghetti monsters either, those respect-lacking twats.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by Dodger13

 

So are we supposed to abandon technology in favor of nature? Are we supposed to forsake everything we have fought to create and revert to the Stone Age? Is that supposed to restore the balance of frequencies?

I think the answer lies IN technology actually. Technology has to be built with the necessary frequencies in mind.

Think portable frequency amplifiers. Put them in your shoe laces...

Or... into your body directly, or is that too transhumanist?

Originally posted by Laykilla
I think the answer lies IN technology actually. Technology has to be built with the necessary frequencies in mind.

Think portable frequency amplifiers. Put them in your shoe laces...

When you say the somewhat meaningless phrase "frequency amplifiers", what comes to mind? What do you envision that to be?

Originally posted by Bedlam

Originally posted by Laykilla
I think the answer lies IN technology actually. Technology has to be built with the necessary frequencies in mind.

Think portable frequency amplifiers. Put them in your shoe laces...

When you say the somewhat meaningless phrase "frequency amplifiers", what comes to mind? What do you envision that to be?

Something that basically emits the necessary frequency and/or increases our perception of said frequency. Essentially allowing ourselves to have more exposure to these frequencies.

BTW, it's not pseudo-science... everything has a frequency that can be measured in hz.

reply to post by Bedlam


I never referred to radio waves when pointing to Gossard as cited by Eastlund. My reference was the order of magnitude that HAARP is able to generate.

It wasn't my claims originally. As I said to Phage in that thread I was merely a messenger of Eastlund's work produced in his last 2 years of life.

He that pointed the flux of 2.1 x 10^-3 Watts/m^2 from HAARP being equivalent to the order of magnitude that Gossard laid out in his paper in the CGS unit.

So not radio waves, but the resulting gravity wave flux.

The time when you asked if I had read the paper, you missed that I did read and posted the fulltext pdf in previous page, and that post showed your confusion I refer to.

Afterwards I quoted the text fraction of the paper that referred to the energy flux.

HAARP puts out a gravity wave flux of 2 ergs/cm^2/sec, converting from Watts/m^2

Gossard gave a close number for June 24 1957 afternoon/night (PM time) and gave a range of 50-100 in general.

I hope the confusion is resolved

(...)

18 ergs/cm2 sec
on June 24 (P.M.),

(...)

However, an energy flux of 50 to 100 ergs/cm2
sec is associated with many storms and frontal
systems.

(...)

Originally posted by Arbitrageur

Originally posted by VeritasAequitas
reply to post by john_bmth

 

You are ostracizing people based on what they believe. The clearly childish and immature "woo-woo" goading just emanates blatant disrespect.

Nobody respects my beliefs in flying spaghetti monsters either, those respect-lacking twats.

In that Quantum Energy thread I had people mocking my belief in magic beans. I find it all so offensive!

Originally posted by Laykilla

Originally posted by Bedlam

Originally posted by Laykilla
I think the answer lies IN technology actually. Technology has to be built with the necessary frequencies in mind.

Think portable frequency amplifiers. Put them in your shoe laces...

When you say the somewhat meaningless phrase "frequency amplifiers", what comes to mind? What do you envision that to be?

Something that basically emits the necessary frequency and/or increases our perception of said frequency. Essentially allowing ourselves to have more exposure to these frequencies.

BTW, it's not pseudo-science... everything has a frequency that can be measured in hz.

edit on 2-12-2012 by Laykilla because: (no reason given)

"frequency amplifier" is wrong because frequencies can't be amplified. 60 cycles per second can't be made louder or quieter - it just IS 60 cycles per second = 60 Hz.

A wave has frequency, and can be amplified, but which wave and in which medium? And at which frequencies?

It certainly seems everything "has" a frequency - indeed the nature of the manifest universe would appear to be essentially vibrational in character - physics, you will find, knows a great deal about vibrations.

When the woo woos bang on about frequency and energy they are generally pretty vague about the details - necessarily so, I would argue, because their claims are based not on experience but on vague, wishful feelings.

Perhaps you would like a microwave "frequency amplifier" to gently cook you while you walk around the house?
The Brave New World of Microwave Home Heating