CIA Dir Rear Admiral R. Hillenkoetter (1960), "It is time for the truth to be brought out in open congressional hearings, through official secrecy and ridicule, citizens are led to believe the unkown flying objects are nonsense". 50 years later, WE ARE STILL BEING MISLED.
"For many years I have lived with a secret, in a secrecy imposed on all specialists and astronauts. I can now reveal that every day, in the USA, our radar instruments capture objects of form and composition unknown to us. And there are thousands of witness reports and a quantity of documents to prove this, but nobody wants to make them public".
Colonel L. Gordon Cooper, Mercury and Gemini Astronaut, in an address to the UN in (1985).
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
I start to become unrelaxed, whenever I see Mitchell's face. The guy did already a huge damage to the scientific community, when he jumped on the ET/UFOtainmant bandwagon (just for a handful dollars) and fools people by colporting and parroting fantastic fairy tales, rumors - and lies. (Note: The guy did not even provide a microscopic particle of first hand information or a tangible proof) Although NASA determinedly called him a liar, people seem to lost their ability to judge things.
Sacha even though we are friends now you, know I got to respond to this. ;-)
:when he jumped on the ET/UFOtainmant bandwagon (just for a handful dollars) and fools people by colporting and parroting fantastic fairy tales, rumors:
Can you provide me a link to evidence that shows proof that Edgar Mitchell is lying through his fucking teeth by receiving $ ?
WinduChi6, I haven't seen any new arg that changed my mind (read the info for my Mitchell/Kerrang vid).
Mitchell *HAS* very good reasons to lie - and he do it. He's deeply involved into UFO/conspiracytainment industry. [The Wikipedia article covers these business connections meticulously] Remember, all space agencies around the world follow the strict policy of noninvolvement into the UFO-topic. And they have very good reasons for that; otherwise they had to defend themselves permanently. ;-))
Let's say he's completely lying. Does that change the fact we've been lied to by our government? What's the big deal if someone tells lies about the subject? The fact it's true doesn't hinge on one person or one story. It's the totality of the evidence and the fact that the media ignores the very credible proof yet highlights the "giggle factor" stories is more proof things are being kept from us. I'm sure a lot of people don't want to know the truth.
bottleslingguy, what in the hell provides you the certainity your govt would tell lies to you? Correct is, every govt in the world can (and does) keep things away from their people, whenever national security is involved. That's the law. And the UFO-topic *IS* a matter of national security, since many misguided people lost their lives. [E.g. the Heavens-Gate mass suicide incident]
And no, truth is not connected to the amount of claimants, it's only connected to a tangible proof.
bottleslingguy, what is funny? Since you haven't answered my question for a tangible proof, your govt told you lies outside the realms of national security and military, I conclude, you assume this claim as true - just because thousends of snake-oil sellers and millions of believers colport and parrot that claim so much. Remember, conspiracy nuts abuse freedom of speech to pour crackpot accusations over govt'l agancies to make money with 'shocking-secret-truths'. So they create distrust.
[what in the hell provides you the certainity your govt would tell lies to you?]
The U.S. gov(my gov) LIE THOUGH THEIR FUCKING TEETH ALL THE TIME.
Ex.1
Back in the 50s when they said to my grand parents, hiding behind a desk made of wood will protect you from a nuclear explosion pressure shock wave of heat.
My friend, you may be surprised, but a heavy wooden desk does very well protect you from the heat- and shock-wave from a nuclear explosion. Since radiation levels [x-rays, gamma, alfa, neutrons] decrease
faster over distance than heat/shock-wave, because the ionized hot shock-front consumes energy from radiation, survivabilty outside of the L100 [absolute lethal] core detonation zone increases dramatically by the said simple mean of protection. So this is a bad example for a lie. Sorry.
And the high press. blast wave traveling at very high supersonic velocities, that will blow a desk and the ones it's protecting away, along with the high shock wave front temperatures that will vaporize anything in it's path.
I'm sorry I'm not trusting my ass behind flammable wood.
I want specifics, what make wood radiation resistant, density or properties? ;-)
Correct is, temperature of of the heatwave can be pretty high - for a very short ime, what means energy is low (W=P·t). In such a case wood won't burn. The same effect, you can even pass your hand thru the flame of a candle. It won't burn you if you make that fast enough.
'Shock wave objection': There is a nice physical law called conservation of momentum, tat says m·v=p=constant; what can be rewriten as m1v1=m2v2. [m=mass, v=speed]. ....
Are you sure you aren't a govt disinformation agent ?
Your trying to convince me that I'm going to survive a nuclear blast wave and the heat it carries, behind a fucking classroom desk.
I know calculating all the physics of a explosion is very complicated because have to run a simulation, but you must have lost your damn mind if you think I'm going to be convince by this argument.
You are going to have to show me a video of someone surviving a nuclear explosion behind a desk. LOL
This topic is rather typical, you can't solve it with 'common sense': Of coarse I do not talk about the L100-zone of a nuclear blast (you can't survive without massive lead shielding and a lot of beton around you). However from the L30...L0.01-radius downward, conventional explosive effects dominate over the radiation - you can survive by a desk. Of coarse, you should read a textbook about physics of detonations to get the whole picture, but the little math is enough to give you an idea.
.. (2 ff) Imagine, the shock wave had v1=330m/s (speed of sound) and the mass of the air (the shock-front) that went against your desk were m1=0.1kg (a rather bold assumption). So p=m1·v1=33mkg/s. Now imagine, your desk had a mass of 75kg. So the initial speed, the desk gets is v2=p/m2=0.44m/s - what is easily to survive. Without the desk, the shockwave would tear your organs apart. Density does not play any role. Further, wood is a very good heat insulator. No IR-radiation passes thru.
A shock wave travel a supersonic speeds, that what makes a shock wave unique.
When the moving shock front encounter a obstruction the low density region of the shock front will increase as the leading front slows down that will backed up the gas flow field and the pressure will build at point of contact that will force that obstruction out of the way.
That will force the desk out of the way or tear it apart.
I'm not going to be convince by you argument Sacha.
WinduChi6, nope. The law of conservation of energy and momentum (1st law of thermodynamics) is valid everywhere and for all forms of energy - and no matters how fast a wave travels. Further, supersonic shock-waves are non-adiabatic, hence they lose their energy very quickly over distance. Destructive effects of shock-waves are well understood, since conventional explosives rely on it. So a hand-grenade is deadly within r=5-10m, but you can detonate it under a steal-helmet you stand on it.
... When the supersonic(6,000m/s) shock front flow field flow over a obstacle that will create a very low pressure region behind it, that will increase the press. in front, & the usual aerodynamic physics is valid here; lift, drag & turbulence
Momentum flux you will have to calculate & use continuity and momentum equations of the incompressible NavierStokes eqs.
So, pu^2=P where p is density tag, u fluid velocity tag and P is pressure.
force density to turbulent fluctuations fluid mom.
Sorry, we won't calculate F(x,y,z,t)-values, but the total p that is transferred from a shock-wave to a heavy wooden plate below the break-point perpendicular to the wave-front. Since only the energy/momentum per area the wave carries can be deposited into the inelastic [inertia!] plate, we can use p=mv=const and W=mv²/2 very well in the first approximation. Since already firework explosives have detonation speeds of 2...9km/s, you can check out these laws in your garden. (Be carful!)
You are assuming the mass of the shock front (m1) is a spherical point mass, it is a fluid m1 is a variable.
When shock front collide with a obstacle, depending the geometry of that obstacle the leading edge will slow down as the trailing edge pill up that will in turn increase the mass m1of the shock front portion at the interaction portion of the obstacle, that will increase the pressure and the force on the obstacle.
You can't use m1v1=m2v2 because the dynamics is complicated...
Law of conservation of momentum tells nothing about geometriy or coupling impedance, so an exact calculation required a FEM (finite elemente model). In the first approximation, we can live with an error-margin of 15%, since the question was, if the plate of a massive desk can protect you from a heat/detonation shock front. Additional hints: Wood has a very high internal friction coefficient (used for speaker enclosures) and unique heat capacity until it is burnt thru (Sojus heat shields).
Ln, a statistical unit describes the percentage of biological entities that die after administration of a particular dose of radiation, poison, or an other harmful form of energy. E.g. L100=all are dead, L10 means 10% of all exposed individues after exposition to a particular dose, etc. In nuclear weapons terms, there is a rule of thumb: The L100 area [no chance to survive] is about 15km² per kiloton. Although a tactical 100kt bomb is not very nice, a 1Gt EHT-H-bomb is definitivly not.
Current military doctrine to maximize destruction but minimize radioactive fallout (that affected own troups or uninvolved countries) is to ignite a nuke ca. 0.5-5km above ground (dependent of size) The L100 rule of thumb 15km²/kt refers to a centerpoint just below the detonation; hence radius is rL100=sqrt(15km²/kt)/PI.
L100-L0-zone equations are published in most military tactical/strategic handbooks (mine is confidential) so I'd look up a military library. Energy of a W76 is 420TJ
There's really not enough room here beside the fact you agreed they lied but they did it for our own good (read: national security). I believe honesty is the best policy regardless of how fragile the mass psyche seems. People are able to adapt, especially to the truth.
bottleslingguy, no doubt, humans can somehow arrange with whatever kind of truth. However, you seem to forget, every knowledge has some implications, not many people think about - but could e.g. reuslt in economical disruptions with 10'000 times the magnitude of the current depression, or, security concerns, we had to fear, any insane individue could turn whole continents into smoking crater - with a homebrewed device of the size of a suitcase. So trust your govt. They aren't evil.
They don't have to be evil, just wrong. With advanced tech they can solve energy/pollution/ hunger problem overnight. I'm not saying my standard of living is so terrible, just that more people can have a better standard of living than they have now. I don't think it's right to hoard this technology. So on the one hand they say we're doing this for your own good and on the other telling us how dangerous and toxic the world has become. TPTB are keeping important things from us and that is wrong.
bottleslingguy, have you ever considered, we might have technologies that are so mindbogglingly energetic, we can't release it to the public domain without a clear and present danger, every insane individue could turn whole continents into smoking craters? Or have you ever tought about, introduction of of completly new MDQP-based tech could turn our economy upside down? Remember, humanity is not even ready for tech we already have. We destroy our planet. Simply wait a couple of centuries. ;-))
So who's using them and to what ends? What's the sense in having the abilities they provide unless it is good for all? How is this stuff helping make things better? No one is saying give nukes to every Tom Dick and Harry, but things could be so much better than they are. I see these things like cold fusion (Eugene Malove style) heating/powering our homes and zero emission vehicles in the public domain not the dangerous stuff. The world is suffering from this hoarding mentality. It's wrong.
bottleslingguy, we have technologies, based on MDQP, that give access to all natural forces. And that's all but good for our primitive species, since it gives the good old Einstein's equation E=m·c² a complete new meaning - of never seen devastations. Without any (!) controllable materials. As nobody could supress nukes but introduce nuclear power plants, nobody e.g. can selectivly release clean aneutronous direct electricity pulsed plasma fusion reactors to power cars and planes. Sorry ;-))
guys dont give sacha any attention hes an operative....hes stationed in Indiana....his name is jamie.....dont let him discourage you.....he is desperately trying to spread disinfo.....trust me on this one.....dont even respond to his evil disinfo bullshit :)
toolkills, you pretended capitulation, but you simply changed the battlefield. Well, three lies more you spread: I'm neither stiationed in Indiana, nor my name is Jamie, nor I desperatly spread disinfo, since every govt can afford today to be silent about all topics of national security. Since I'm not amused about four-lettered words, I'd slowly worry about, you woke up one morning with your balls in your mouth, while a mutilated cow starred at you. Or did I quote somebody incorrectly?
How does that reply correspond with the real world of everyday people? I'm sure there is some sort of happy medium between what you think I am implying and what you are talking about now. Governments lie for the good of mankind meanwhile everything goes to shit, people suffer needlessly and the rich get richer.
As far as tangible proof, how about dumbing that down a bit so I can understand whether you are right, wrong or moot.
TrueSkeptic77, obviously, you want your YT-account closed, since your occupation seems to be insult people with other opinions, followed by imputations designed to systematically discredit YT-users. Remember, you are on my radar, so I've collected pretty much of your posts and filed it. You have been warned.
Are you going to make a collage of the real facts and admire them secretly? But still continue this spam of bs all over concerning the UAP and ET phenomena?
I want to be on your radar, because pseudoskeptics need to be dealt with, if people like you can ridicule subject and people to silence then the science and common sense have lost.
TrueSkeptic77, I've warned you. Despite this clear statement, you continue to bombard me with insulting posts.
From now, you shouldn't be surprised, what will happen. It's the most extreme sanction, I've ever taken against a human being. Maybe you had thought before, against who you started a cyberbullying campaign and against who better not.
8:00 "I'm gonna make my [biography] a short one...MY FATHER WAS BORN IN KEY WEST. He then traveled north..."
lol, fucking rambler.
Great post!
pdderek 2 years ago 3
If President Obama disclosed the information, there would be no panic. Too many people would be trying to knock him down....
Oathblivion 2 years ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
CIA Dir Rear Admiral R. Hillenkoetter (1960), "It is time for the truth to be brought out in open congressional hearings, through official secrecy and ridicule, citizens are led to believe the unkown flying objects are nonsense". 50 years later, WE ARE STILL BEING MISLED.
MJ12DAVE 2 years ago
"At no time, when the astronauts were in space were they alone: there was a constant surveillance by UFOs".
~ Astronaut Scott Carpenter
lllwindrunner 2 years ago
Your Fucking Stupid!
Immobilizer06 2 years ago
"For many years I have lived with a secret, in a secrecy imposed on all specialists and astronauts. I can now reveal that every day, in the USA, our radar instruments capture objects of form and composition unknown to us. And there are thousands of witness reports and a quantity of documents to prove this, but nobody wants to make them public".
Colonel L. Gordon Cooper, Mercury and Gemini Astronaut, in an address to the UN in (1985).
lllwindrunner 2 years ago
Thanks for this -- can you make a playlist for it?
AscensionHelp 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I start to become unrelaxed, whenever I see Mitchell's face. The guy did already a huge damage to the scientific community, when he jumped on the ET/UFOtainmant bandwagon (just for a handful dollars) and fools people by colporting and parroting fantastic fairy tales, rumors - and lies. (Note: The guy did not even provide a microscopic particle of first hand information or a tangible proof) Although NASA determinedly called him a liar, people seem to lost their ability to judge things.
;-))
sacha4you 2 years ago
@sacha4you:
Sacha even though we are friends now you, know I got to respond to this. ;-)
:when he jumped on the ET/UFOtainmant bandwagon (just for a handful dollars) and fools people by colporting and parroting fantastic fairy tales, rumors:
Can you provide me a link to evidence that shows proof that Edgar Mitchell is lying through his fucking teeth by receiving $ ?
I don't see no reason for him to lie.
For what?
:NASA determinedly called him a liar:
And don't get me started on NASA. :-)
WinduChi6 2 years ago
WinduChi6, I haven't seen any new arg that changed my mind (read the info for my Mitchell/Kerrang vid).
Mitchell *HAS* very good reasons to lie - and he do it. He's deeply involved into UFO/conspiracytainment industry. [The Wikipedia article covers these business connections meticulously] Remember, all space agencies around the world follow the strict policy of noninvolvement into the UFO-topic. And they have very good reasons for that; otherwise they had to defend themselves permanently. ;-))
sacha4you 2 years ago
Let's say he's completely lying. Does that change the fact we've been lied to by our government? What's the big deal if someone tells lies about the subject? The fact it's true doesn't hinge on one person or one story. It's the totality of the evidence and the fact that the media ignores the very credible proof yet highlights the "giggle factor" stories is more proof things are being kept from us. I'm sure a lot of people don't want to know the truth.
bottleslingguy 2 years ago
bottleslingguy, what in the hell provides you the certainity your govt would tell lies to you? Correct is, every govt in the world can (and does) keep things away from their people, whenever national security is involved. That's the law. And the UFO-topic *IS* a matter of national security, since many misguided people lost their lives. [E.g. the Heavens-Gate mass suicide incident]
And no, truth is not connected to the amount of claimants, it's only connected to a tangible proof.
;-))
sacha4you 2 years ago
What makes me think my/the govt is lying to me? That's funny.
bottleslingguy 2 years ago
bottleslingguy, what is funny? Since you haven't answered my question for a tangible proof, your govt told you lies outside the realms of national security and military, I conclude, you assume this claim as true - just because thousends of snake-oil sellers and millions of believers colport and parrot that claim so much. Remember, conspiracy nuts abuse freedom of speech to pour crackpot accusations over govt'l agancies to make money with 'shocking-secret-truths'. So they create distrust.
;-))
sacha4you 2 years ago
[what in the hell provides you the certainity your govt would tell lies to you?]
The U.S. gov(my gov) LIE THOUGH THEIR FUCKING TEETH ALL THE TIME.
Ex.1
Back in the 50s when they said to my grand parents, hiding behind a desk made of wood will protect you from a nuclear explosion pressure shock wave of heat.
And LYING, about the FUCKING RADIATION exposure.
There are plenty of other LIEs, Sacha. ;-)
WinduChi6 2 years ago
My friend, you may be surprised, but a heavy wooden desk does very well protect you from the heat- and shock-wave from a nuclear explosion. Since radiation levels [x-rays, gamma, alfa, neutrons] decrease
faster over distance than heat/shock-wave, because the ionized hot shock-front consumes energy from radiation, survivabilty outside of the L100 [absolute lethal] core detonation zone increases dramatically by the said simple mean of protection. So this is a bad example for a lie. Sorry.
;-))
sacha4you 2 years ago
@sacha4you:
Ok, you got me on the radiation,Sacha. ;-)
I will admit a mistake!
But!
What about the combustion temperature the wood?
And the high press. blast wave traveling at very high supersonic velocities, that will blow a desk and the ones it's protecting away, along with the high shock wave front temperatures that will vaporize anything in it's path.
I'm sorry I'm not trusting my ass behind flammable wood.
I want specifics, what make wood radiation resistant, density or properties? ;-)
WinduChi6 2 years ago
'Combustion temperature of wood'
Correct is, temperature of of the heatwave can be pretty high - for a very short ime, what means energy is low (W=P·t). In such a case wood won't burn. The same effect, you can even pass your hand thru the flame of a candle. It won't burn you if you make that fast enough.
'Shock wave objection': There is a nice physical law called conservation of momentum, tat says m·v=p=constant; what can be rewriten as m1v1=m2v2. [m=mass, v=speed]. ....
sacha4you 2 years ago
@sacha4you:
Are you sure you aren't a govt disinformation agent ?
Your trying to convince me that I'm going to survive a nuclear blast wave and the heat it carries, behind a fucking classroom desk.
I know calculating all the physics of a explosion is very complicated because have to run a simulation, but you must have lost your damn mind if you think I'm going to be convince by this argument.
You are going to have to show me a video of someone surviving a nuclear explosion behind a desk. LOL
WinduChi6 2 years ago
This topic is rather typical, you can't solve it with 'common sense': Of coarse I do not talk about the L100-zone of a nuclear blast (you can't survive without massive lead shielding and a lot of beton around you). However from the L30...L0.01-radius downward, conventional explosive effects dominate over the radiation - you can survive by a desk. Of coarse, you should read a textbook about physics of detonations to get the whole picture, but the little math is enough to give you an idea.
;-))
sacha4you 2 years ago
.. (2 ff) Imagine, the shock wave had v1=330m/s (speed of sound) and the mass of the air (the shock-front) that went against your desk were m1=0.1kg (a rather bold assumption). So p=m1·v1=33mkg/s. Now imagine, your desk had a mass of 75kg. So the initial speed, the desk gets is v2=p/m2=0.44m/s - what is easily to survive. Without the desk, the shockwave would tear your organs apart. Density does not play any role. Further, wood is a very good heat insulator. No IR-radiation passes thru.
;-))
sacha4you 2 years ago
@Sacha:
A shock wave travel a supersonic speeds, that what makes a shock wave unique.
When the moving shock front encounter a obstruction the low density region of the shock front will increase as the leading front slows down that will backed up the gas flow field and the pressure will build at point of contact that will force that obstruction out of the way.
That will force the desk out of the way or tear it apart.
I'm not going to be convince by you argument Sacha.
WinduChi6 2 years ago
WinduChi6, nope. The law of conservation of energy and momentum (1st law of thermodynamics) is valid everywhere and for all forms of energy - and no matters how fast a wave travels. Further, supersonic shock-waves are non-adiabatic, hence they lose their energy very quickly over distance. Destructive effects of shock-waves are well understood, since conventional explosives rely on it. So a hand-grenade is deadly within r=5-10m, but you can detonate it under a steal-helmet you stand on it.
;-))
sacha4you 2 years ago
@Sacha:
... When the supersonic(6,000m/s) shock front flow field flow over a obstacle that will create a very low pressure region behind it, that will increase the press. in front, & the usual aerodynamic physics is valid here; lift, drag & turbulence
Momentum flux you will have to calculate & use continuity and momentum equations of the incompressible NavierStokes eqs.
So, pu^2=P where p is density tag, u fluid velocity tag and P is pressure.
force density to turbulent fluctuations fluid mom.
WinduChi6 2 years ago
Sorry, we won't calculate F(x,y,z,t)-values, but the total p that is transferred from a shock-wave to a heavy wooden plate below the break-point perpendicular to the wave-front. Since only the energy/momentum per area the wave carries can be deposited into the inelastic [inertia!] plate, we can use p=mv=const and W=mv²/2 very well in the first approximation. Since already firework explosives have detonation speeds of 2...9km/s, you can check out these laws in your garden. (Be carful!)
;-))
sacha4you 2 years ago
@Sacha:
You are assuming the mass of the shock front (m1) is a spherical point mass, it is a fluid m1 is a variable.
When shock front collide with a obstacle, depending the geometry of that obstacle the leading edge will slow down as the trailing edge pill up that will in turn increase the mass m1of the shock front portion at the interaction portion of the obstacle, that will increase the pressure and the force on the obstacle.
You can't use m1v1=m2v2 because the dynamics is complicated...
WinduChi6 2 years ago
Law of conservation of momentum tells nothing about geometriy or coupling impedance, so an exact calculation required a FEM (finite elemente model). In the first approximation, we can live with an error-margin of 15%, since the question was, if the plate of a massive desk can protect you from a heat/detonation shock front. Additional hints: Wood has a very high internal friction coefficient (used for speaker enclosures) and unique heat capacity until it is burnt thru (Sojus heat shields).
;-))
sacha4you 2 years ago
@Sacha:
Ok, Sacha what do you mean by L100?
For I can understand what distance from the core detonation zone you are referring to? ;-)
WinduChi6 2 years ago
Ln, a statistical unit describes the percentage of biological entities that die after administration of a particular dose of radiation, poison, or an other harmful form of energy. E.g. L100=all are dead, L10 means 10% of all exposed individues after exposition to a particular dose, etc. In nuclear weapons terms, there is a rule of thumb: The L100 area [no chance to survive] is about 15km² per kiloton. Although a tactical 100kt bomb is not very nice, a 1Gt EHT-H-bomb is definitivly not.
;-))
sacha4you 2 years ago
@ Sacha:
So, what do you mean 5 miles from a detonation zone or 3 miles 5km x 3km?
I need to know what distance from the center of the explosion you are referring to.
For a 100kt nuclear explosion or 4.184E014 J of energy.
Also how do u calculate Ln ? ;-)
WinduChi6 2 years ago
Current military doctrine to maximize destruction but minimize radioactive fallout (that affected own troups or uninvolved countries) is to ignite a nuke ca. 0.5-5km above ground (dependent of size) The L100 rule of thumb 15km²/kt refers to a centerpoint just below the detonation; hence radius is rL100=sqrt(15km²/kt)/PI.
L100-L0-zone equations are published in most military tactical/strategic handbooks (mine is confidential) so I'd look up a military library. Energy of a W76 is 420TJ
;-))
sacha4you 2 years ago
There's really not enough room here beside the fact you agreed they lied but they did it for our own good (read: national security). I believe honesty is the best policy regardless of how fragile the mass psyche seems. People are able to adapt, especially to the truth.
bottleslingguy 2 years ago
bottleslingguy, no doubt, humans can somehow arrange with whatever kind of truth. However, you seem to forget, every knowledge has some implications, not many people think about - but could e.g. reuslt in economical disruptions with 10'000 times the magnitude of the current depression, or, security concerns, we had to fear, any insane individue could turn whole continents into smoking crater - with a homebrewed device of the size of a suitcase. So trust your govt. They aren't evil.
;-))
sacha4you 2 years ago
They don't have to be evil, just wrong. With advanced tech they can solve energy/pollution/ hunger problem overnight. I'm not saying my standard of living is so terrible, just that more people can have a better standard of living than they have now. I don't think it's right to hoard this technology. So on the one hand they say we're doing this for your own good and on the other telling us how dangerous and toxic the world has become. TPTB are keeping important things from us and that is wrong.
bottleslingguy 2 years ago
bottleslingguy, have you ever considered, we might have technologies that are so mindbogglingly energetic, we can't release it to the public domain without a clear and present danger, every insane individue could turn whole continents into smoking craters? Or have you ever tought about, introduction of of completly new MDQP-based tech could turn our economy upside down? Remember, humanity is not even ready for tech we already have. We destroy our planet. Simply wait a couple of centuries. ;-))
sacha4you 2 years ago
So who's using them and to what ends? What's the sense in having the abilities they provide unless it is good for all? How is this stuff helping make things better? No one is saying give nukes to every Tom Dick and Harry, but things could be so much better than they are. I see these things like cold fusion (Eugene Malove style) heating/powering our homes and zero emission vehicles in the public domain not the dangerous stuff. The world is suffering from this hoarding mentality. It's wrong.
bottleslingguy 2 years ago
bottleslingguy, we have technologies, based on MDQP, that give access to all natural forces. And that's all but good for our primitive species, since it gives the good old Einstein's equation E=m·c² a complete new meaning - of never seen devastations. Without any (!) controllable materials. As nobody could supress nukes but introduce nuclear power plants, nobody e.g. can selectivly release clean aneutronous direct electricity pulsed plasma fusion reactors to power cars and planes. Sorry ;-))
sacha4you 2 years ago
guys dont give sacha any attention hes an operative....hes stationed in Indiana....his name is jamie.....dont let him discourage you.....he is desperately trying to spread disinfo.....trust me on this one.....dont even respond to his evil disinfo bullshit :)
toolkills 2 years ago
toolkills, you pretended capitulation, but you simply changed the battlefield. Well, three lies more you spread: I'm neither stiationed in Indiana, nor my name is Jamie, nor I desperatly spread disinfo, since every govt can afford today to be silent about all topics of national security. Since I'm not amused about four-lettered words, I'd slowly worry about, you woke up one morning with your balls in your mouth, while a mutilated cow starred at you. Or did I quote somebody incorrectly?
;-))
sacha4you 2 years ago
.......you're a jerk
toolkills 2 years ago
How does that reply correspond with the real world of everyday people? I'm sure there is some sort of happy medium between what you think I am implying and what you are talking about now. Governments lie for the good of mankind meanwhile everything goes to shit, people suffer needlessly and the rich get richer.
As far as tangible proof, how about dumbing that down a bit so I can understand whether you are right, wrong or moot.
bottleslingguy 2 years ago
I actually more and more think you are either crazy, for real or you are getting paid to write all this bs.
TrueSkeptic77 2 years ago
TrueSkeptic77, obviously, you want your YT-account closed, since your occupation seems to be insult people with other opinions, followed by imputations designed to systematically discredit YT-users. Remember, you are on my radar, so I've collected pretty much of your posts and filed it. You have been warned.
;-))
sacha4you 2 years ago
Wow that must be one of the most stupid thing anyone have written to me.
Whats the matter, are you arguments out, wait you have never had any and now you are on the whining train?
Well and you are on my radar "buddy" I have looked at you activity all over, same over and over again.
I urge you to collect the wisdom and start to use real logic.
Are you flirting with me?
TrueSkeptic77 2 years ago
Are you going to make a collage of the real facts and admire them secretly? But still continue this spam of bs all over concerning the UAP and ET phenomena?
I want to be on your radar, because pseudoskeptics need to be dealt with, if people like you can ridicule subject and people to silence then the science and common sense have lost.
And that can never happend.
TrueSkeptic77 2 years ago
And I will advice you not to treathen me again with such bs.
You ridicule comments are all over, dont you ever forget that.
TrueSkeptic77 2 years ago
TrueSkeptic77, I've warned you. Despite this clear statement, you continue to bombard me with insulting posts.
From now, you shouldn't be surprised, what will happen. It's the most extreme sanction, I've ever taken against a human being. Maybe you had thought before, against who you started a cyberbullying campaign and against who better not.
;-))
sacha4you 2 years ago
Whining from a person who have made personal insults, ridicule to an artform for you pseudoskeptics falls to deaf ears.
And you should remember, your comments are alot worse then mine are.
TrueSkeptic77 2 years ago
Wonderful Excellent Video! 5/5.
___
WowDisclosure 2 years ago 3