Dr Oppenheimer on Ancient Places Destroyed by Atomic Weapons.

page: 8
51
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 14 2014 @ 09:15 PM
link   
2 more




posted on Feb, 14 2014 @ 09:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Polydidactic361
 


laST one



posted on Feb, 15 2014 @ 05:14 AM
link   
reply to post by raymundoko
 


I am still at a loss to understand how the ark was powered up to contgain an electrical charge if that is what it had. Harte says that if it was rubbed on both the inner and outer sides that would do it. However we know one died touching it and even if one were dressed in safety gear,( which the carriers wore), I can't imagine one rubbing away and not getting a shock if that were the method of charging it.

Regarding the Holies of Holies. I thought the Temples in Egypt had Holies of Holies within them and I know from a documentary on a temple in Syria that it was a replica of the one in Jerusalem and also had a Holies of Holies within it. Surely with only one ark building temples miles apart in travel-time doesn't make sense if the Holies of Holies was not actually holy without the ark. Who had the authority to say where the ark stayed. Its unlikely they were keen to move such a dangerous item around regularly to the different temples.

So much simply does make sense when one looks at it. Its also disconcerting when one realises that every effort has been made by the Church in the West to ridicule and to make its congregations ignore other religion's beliefs, even to the point of making people feel uneasy if they adopt modern new age healing methods that have an Eastern root. I know some of the congregation believed that by having anything to do with Buddism or Hinduism we were 'Calling their Gods down onto our heads'. Which made me smile when I asked the guy who had just said that, 'how come they have Gods and we have a God e.g. there must be a number of them and not just one'. However the church had achieved its object in that people were afraid to read about other religions and their beliefs which has stopped much curiosity and of course a broader knowledge of our past. The trouble is that the Indian documents are so immense and to read the Mahbarata will take a very long time, which is probably why more people are not asking questions about what that manuscript actually tells us.



posted on Feb, 15 2014 @ 06:45 AM
link   
These ancient weapons were not nuclear weapons, the ancient text tell us exactly what they were. The Aryans brought with them into India story's about weapons called "Astras" The Brahm-astra was a type of astra that when activated had effects similar to our nuclear weapons but did not use nuclear fission/fusion. They were objects created and then charged with mantras, we could say their principle of operation was sound or vibration.

It is thought by many that the ritual device called a vajra is in fact a representation of one of these ancient astras

en.wikipedia.org...
edit on 15-2-2014 by LUXUS because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2014 @ 09:09 AM
link   

Shiloh7
reply to post by raymundoko
 


I am still at a loss to understand how the ark was powered up to contgain an electrical charge if that is what it had. Harte says that if it was rubbed on both the inner and outer sides that would do it. However we know one died touching it and even if one were dressed in safety gear,( which the carriers wore), I can't imagine one rubbing away and not getting a shock if that were the method of charging it.


Again, one would need to touch both the interior and exterior gold gilding simultaneously to complete the circuit.

Admittedly, charging such a capacitor by rubbing it would take a lot of rubbing for it to be deadly. However, if the exterior was grounded, say if the Ark was sitting on another gold artifact like a holder - which doesn't seem that improbable, it could even be charged by atmospheric phenomena.

Polishing the exterior (note - not the interior, as you thought I meant) of the Ark, depending on the polishing cloth, would either add electrons to the surface, or remove them from it. Electrons would either flow through the body of the polisher onto the surface, or flow, again through the body of the (presumably grounded) polisher off of the surface. This would result in a net charge on the exterior, resulting in a net charge of equal and opposite value on the interior surface. When these surfaces are connected, as by the hand of some unfortunate soul, the charge would then flow.

Atmospheric charging would result from charges in the atmosphere flowing to (or from) ground from (or onto) the exterior while the interior has no ground connection.

An atmospheric charge would naturally return to equilibrium as the atmosphere itself returned to the previous state of lesser charge, but only if the Ark was left in contact with whatever was grounding it.

Sure, it's unlikely in the extreme, but certainly explainable scientifically, if it is true.

Harte
edit on 2/15/2014 by Harte because: (no reason given)





new topics
 
51
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join