Featured Title:
Bending the Boyne: a Novel of Ancient Ireland |
 |
| Great Stone Circles, Aubrey Burl |
 |
| Login |
|
Don't have an account yet? You can create one. As a registered user you have some advantages like your own home page, fewer ads, and your contributions link to your page. |
| Who's Online |
There are currently, 119 guests and 5 members online.
You are a guest. To join in, please register for free by clicking here |
| |
Moderated by : davidmorgan , TimPrevett , Andy B , Klingon , MickM , bat400 , sem , Runemage , TheCaptain
The Megalithic Portal and Megalith Map : Index >>
Sacred Sites and Megalithic Mysteries >> Did Bronze Age Man have Digital Cameras?
|
 |
| Author |
Did Bronze Age Man have Digital Cameras? |
brigantia
Joined:
13-01-2002
Messages: 804
from Yorkshire & Argyll
 OFF-Line
|  Posted 24-05-2008 at 23:35
Quote:
|
On 2008-05-24 19:36, cropredy wrote:
I am posting a modern Newtonian sort of idea as to the creative forces involved, that are based upon my own findings, there is nobody else to confer with though prof.Aspden is hugely impressive, I will give a link to him and his aether theorises.
You then revert to "Its ballox Kev" just add IMO, then that is fine.
Then you spin off again into"only you and few deluded fruits"
Those type of things, I do not find impressive, did you write your book, or did someone else do it for you?
Finally you state the sanchez sorted that, with reference to the ionisation of jet engines, sorry but he didn't, I have made it my business to comprehend as best I can all there is to know about this technology that is kept secret.
Gravity and altered fields are of huge interest to myself as I strive to fathom out what is moving my dowsing rods, as I have personally been affected by both of these in altered to the normal condition .
I have experienced many times the alteration caused by the moon, by been precisely positioned at concentrated sink points on the matrix when the moons field affects the relative balance of the Earth/sun fields, this is not in any lying as been obnoxiously stated by baffoons on here, it is just myself relaying, admittadely inadequately what I have experienced.
I have no need as you try to TELL me to look back at any of my posts, I simply report that which I detect and deduce, many upon here contribute no positive input, just constant ridicule and gutter remarks, and I am afraid you fall into that group most of the time.
I don't mind in the least anyone doubting or refusing to believe any thing I or others report, but at least try to give alternatives as you have found or percieve, not just this constant tripe that is been churned out.
I find muddymick is zero content, with you close at heel to him, perhaps you just think it is a kind of sport to wind up others?
Kevin, neither insane or an imbecile, just determined to crack these megaliths and the reason for their construction, and no amount of custerd pies will stop me .
It just requires a free and fearless attitude , luckily there are others upon here who are not afraid to speak of what they find and deduce, you appear either to know nothing, or are afraid to debate with mike in particuler, again you resort to petty name calling and running away
|
|
Kev - I've tried to give room to your notions, with prods here and there, but you ignore everything. You are an imbecile. You back nothing up, apart from repeating your same waffle over and over, without proofs. The sign of a stupid idiot, nothing less. And if you think otherwise (as you do) you're deluded aswell. Your notions are backwards, old-fashioned, and the modern scientific paradigms are way ahead of your limited worldviews. But as you don't read, you wouldn't know such things.
Please get used to this approach from me from now on Kev, cos you deserve it lad. Your a dimwit who needs educating about leys and the likes - but as you're not into learning wider issues (unless it's from some other fruitcake like Gay-Mike) I s'ppose I might aswell follow your lead and simply tell it "as I see it" (to quote you) and insult your uneducated nonsense from now on. It should be fun!
Yours, in anticipation of your future diatribes,
Paulus
xxx
 Profile
 Email
 Reply
|
brigantia
Joined:
13-01-2002
Messages: 804
from Yorkshire & Argyll
OFF-Line
| Posted 24-05-2008 at 23:45
I'd say you're one of the sheep Kev - that's a certainty. You just look out for, and follow those folk who reinforce your deluded and incorrect notions of reality. Your inability to check out things other individuals suggest to you is ignored, just like the narrow-minded sheep you keep bleeting about.
By the way: did you read some of this Harold Aspden's stuff? If you did, I'd have to say that's secondhand material surely, if we follow your backward logic, which then makes anything he says utterly wrong, surely? Or is this guy OK cos you say it is? If not, can you please explain why this dood speaks sense (and why we should check it out) when you tell us to ignore scientists and not to read other people's secondhand stuff?
Go on - try your best!
Good luck - Paulus
Profile
Email
Reply
|
cropredy
Joined:
01-01-2006
Messages: 5525
from Oxon
 ON-Line
| Posted 25-05-2008 at 09:36
Brigantia,
You do exactly what you feel is right, so will I.
I do not feel any need to resort to name slinging and the likes, I left that behind me after eight years spent in boxing rings.
I have great confidence in Dr Aspden, if you read through his sight he explains the position he knows he is had to adopt with regards to the established scientific norm.
Old fashioned ways are not wrong ways, the way of the witch and gypsy are old fashioned, are they wrong?
If you didn't sense the lady at the rollrights, you missed out.
I am looking ever more into the future , to reveal the past, too many sheep have flattened past knowledge trails, far far too many.
kevin, little black sheep, hobbit.
Profile
Reply
|
Sanchez
Joined:
12-07-2006
Messages: 202
OFF-Line
| Posted 25-05-2008 at 09:41
Quote:
|
On 2008-05-24 19:36, cropredy wrote:
Finally you state the sanchez sorted that, with reference to the ionisation of jet engines, sorry but he didn't, I have made it my business to comprehend as best I can all there is to know about this technology that is kept secret. |
|
Can I just gently point out that that statement illustrates your complete failure to grasp the application at all? The aircraft in question doesn't ionise the engines as you've stated. It ionises the air in front of the leading edges of the wings in order to disupt the air and produce less 'drag' for the wings. Hence the engines operate more efficiently and the resultant need for less fuel. Hardly 'other-world', 'secret', hidden technology FFS! Simple, simple demonstrable SCIENCE in operation.
I mean, really! This simpe failure to understand basic things is where many of these 'dreamt-up' conspiracy theories come from. Kevin, you in your own words have just shown better than anything from me or anyone else where the/your silly, silly ideas come from.
I humbly thank you for that. 
Profile
Reply
|
cropredy
Joined:
01-01-2006
Messages: 5525
from Oxon
ON-Line
| Posted 25-05-2008 at 11:13
Sanchez,
What you say is partially true, and all they want to TELL you.
I will not overload this thread with too much about cesium additions to the exhaust gases and millions of volts been applied across the hull of the plane, but it doesn't just fly by propulsion, and its all by field.You can sheep like believe what you are told, and bob about in your pea green drilling rig feeling very contented.
The universe is full of wonderous things, patiently waiting for our wits to grow sharper, I am sharpening my wits daily.
kevin
Profile
Reply
|
cropredy
Joined:
01-01-2006
Messages: 5525
from Oxon
ON-Line
| Posted 25-05-2008 at 11:30
Paul,
It's all about scale, everything is ONE, just at different scale.
Well done with the video.
What about this planet been hollow?
All this nonesense of gravity been focussed into the centre, it would implode?
Much more likely that its hollow and that hydrogen is the most abundant constituent, the flows in/out of the poles would then travel about a hollow interior and assist the turn of the spin of the orbs, they then would become super attractive to the incoming which would attach themselves to the positive.
I suspect that the buds on trees etc are highly positive, and your orbs are been absorbed thus allowing creation of the new plant growth?
Kevin
Profile
Reply
|
mikecroley
Joined:
27-10-2006
Messages: 1655
OFF-Line
| Posted 25-05-2008 at 11:51
Quote:
|
On 2008-05-24 23:35, brigantia wrote:
Yours, in anticipation of your future diatribes,
Paulus
xxx
|
|
And I yours Pauly.
Paul - I've tried to give room to your notions, with prods here and there, but you ignore everything. You are an imbecile. You back nothing up, apart from repeating your same waffle over and over, without proofs. The sign of a stupid idiot, nothing less. And if you think otherwise (as you do) you're deluded aswell. Your notions are backwards, old-fashioned, and the modern scientific paradigms are way ahead of your limited worldviews. But as you don't understand all you* read, you wouldn't know such things.
I think your own words apply to you just as well as to Kev and others Paul.
Back to your EM experiences at sacred sites and the affects on your CNS interest me.
I take it you do understand what happens to the CNS when you eat Daffs at sacred sites and the conditions are right? Do I also assume you understand how these experiences reappear via your own EM field?
Please, in your own words if you can.
mike
Profile
Reply
|
cropredy
Joined:
01-01-2006
Messages: 5525
from Oxon
ON-Line
| Posted 25-05-2008 at 12:18
Paulcmuir,
The grand canyon does have the apperance of an upward push tear in the fabric, but I suspect an electrical cause , where the matter is simply reverted instantly back into its origonal condition/s.
If you look at a globe, and think of the volcano errupting recently in Chile, spin the globe and view what is aprox opposite, you will be in the region of burma and China, consider that an overload along a pathway led into Burma causing the spiral tornados, this then will have permeated straight through the globe and electrically discharged at the volcano.
Then lots of the discharged elements may re-form with incoming flows all around the globe?
Of course they may form as balls, which our resident band of sheep will all say is balls, but they don't try and give any reason of where the balls come from, maybe they have none themselves?, and prefer to just critise and laugh?
Kevin
Profile
Reply
|
mikecroley
Joined:
27-10-2006
Messages: 1655
OFF-Line
| Posted 25-05-2008 at 13:11
Quote:
|
On 2008-05-25 12:09, paulcmuir wrote:
[quote]
On 2008-05-25 11:30, cropredy wrote:
Paul,
It's all about scale, everything is ONE, just at different scale.
Well done with the video.
What about this planet been hollow?
All this nonesense of gravity been focussed into the centre, it would implode?
Much more likely that its hollow and that hydrogen is the most abundant constituent, the flows in/out of the poles would then travel about a hollow interior and assist the turn of the spin of the orbs, they then would become super attractive to the incoming which would attach themselves to the positive.
I suspect that the buds on trees etc are highly positive, and your orbs are been absorbed thus allowing creation of the new plant growth?
Kevin
|
|
do some research on branes (string and m theory) and how they transfer energy through the dimensions, its boring but once your can grasp it you will be able to understand the output and input of the flows you feel. including what's at the centre of the planets, stars, and most importantly our hearts, known by many cultures and refured to as the god or creation within
Paul
branes
[/quote]
The exact projections of the Platonic solids are what dictates the fabric of this planet.
Take those crystalline spheres I posted earlier in this thread and lay one over the other. You'll notice there are points devoid of any structure, the black spots. These are the 'sacred' spots where all the good stuff is going on. I stuck my 400 sqr foot purple Swastika in one on the solstice of 2003 at Avebury.
mike
Profile
Reply
|
Sanchez
Joined:
12-07-2006
Messages: 202
OFF-Line
| Posted 25-05-2008 at 13:59
Quote:
|
On 2008-05-24 15:46, paulcmuir wrote:
[quote]
On 2008-05-24 10:20, Sanchez wrote:
[quote]
On 2008-05-24 10:04, paulcmuir wrote:
we just dont know
|
|
Paul, I'm at work in a 3rd world country with crap connections. Can you give us a brief synopsis?
[/quote]
Hi
its better viewed, for you can observe the body language of the particle physicists when questioned by Sir Patrick Moore. The format of the programme entitled "We just don't know" has an astrophysicist's , astronomer and a leading partial physisican,as guests, Sir Patrick Moore plays the devils advocate by asking probing questions ,such as "if space is expanding what is it expanding into"
this programme is the 666 of the sky at night Sir Patrick Moore backtracks to his past predictions none of which were correct, in fact having watched this programme for years i can not remember a programme that did not include the words" we were not expecting this" whilst reveiwng the latest images. The conclusions of the programme is that we may never know and we may not be able to cross referenced science observed on the earth to space and we may not be able to hold the information or perceive the vastness of the creation
i belive one of the aspects in question" the dark energy and matter" could be resolved by serious study into the wave bar particle nature of the process of orbs but until this is taken seriously it will elude us.
the constant speed of light is questioned in the programme which i have been predicting for years, another prediction is the quantum nature of string and membrane theory that is yet to be discovered but in that understanding gravity, the constant speed of light,the expanding earth, the source of the suns energy,different rotation of planets will all have to be re assessed, so i am not expecting any progression in my life time unless its seen again on mass as in the 16thc
Paul
[ This message was edited by: paulcmuir on 2008-05-24 16:10 ]
[/quote]
Paul, thankyou for that. I will endeavour to watch it when I get home.
Profile
Reply
|
Sanchez
Joined:
12-07-2006
Messages: 202
OFF-Line
| Posted 25-05-2008 at 14:45
Quote:
|
On 2008-05-25 11:13, cropredy wrote:
Sanchez,
What you say is partially true, and all they want to TELL you.
I will not overload this thread with too much about cesium additions to the exhaust gases and millions of volts been applied across the hull of the plane, but it doesn't just fly by propulsion, and its all by field.You can sheep like believe what you are told, and bob about in your pea green drilling rig feeling very contented.
The universe is full of wonderous things, patiently waiting for our wits to grow sharper, I am sharpening my wits daily.
kevin
|
|
1st. Can we please use the English spelling of cAesium and not the spelling you've taken from an evening's mad 'googling' of wacko American websites?
2nd. Where do the millions of volts come from? Do you actually know how big multi-Mwatt generators are? I do as I've run and operated them in the past.
3rd. You now say a voltage is applied across the hull - so it's not the leading edges of the wings anymore? - something that would actually make sense.
4th. I don't, and have never worked on drilling rigs.
5th. I can make my own mind up, so when someone explains things I do listen, and then decide whether it's bollox or not - like I do with your posts. That's why I can pick most of your posts apart logically and thoroughly. TBH, some I don't care about, and some are the ravings of a certifiable loony.
6th. Erm, if this plane flies by 'field' (whatever the ***** that is), why does it have aerodynamically designed wings of such a surface area needed to lift 72 tonnes and why have jet engines? It could just be a big 'box', or sphere or any such shape. Is it to hide the technology? Shouldn't think so, it was a secret stealth plane!
7th. Your wits are not sharpening, on the contrary I think that many people here have witnessed a true descent into madness. Dowsing is one thing, but thinking that your rods will tell you, Kevin, the nature of the universe and turn you into the planets expert on aircraft, stone circles, time travel, crop circles, hollow earth, plasma flows, fibonacchi, hydrogen filled planets, propulsion theory, gravity effects and control demonstrates your own downwards 'Spiral' (see what I did there?). You know your family are worried - you alluded to as much before - people here and on other sites either tolerate your ramblings, exclude you or fruitlessly challenge your 'hoovered off t'internet' theories. We've watched you read various theories, combine them in a muddled, messy, mass and regurgitate them in a totally random fashion whilst telling eveyone else they're wrong and that to follow 'what we're told' is a mistake. What part of 'what we're told' are you referring to? ..every part of science? ..every part of physics, chemistry, biology, mathematics, quantum mechanics?? People have died proving the things we now know, but you're saying everyone else has got it wrong except for all of these 'alternative' websites and pulications. You have proven exactly 'squat'! Well, if the Govt's of the world were as powerful in controlling info as you say, (look at the 9/11, moon landing, JFK, GW successes - oh silly me!) then would they not have closed down these information outlets.
8th - Where, oh ***** where are the big holes at the N and S poles that let the hydrogen in and out?
Profile
Reply
|
cropredy
Joined:
01-01-2006
Messages: 5525
from Oxon
ON-Line
| Posted 25-05-2008 at 15:52
Sanchez,
I am not going to even attempt to answer your rantings.
It is almost as though nerve ends are been hit with some of you?
A paranoid obsession with been correct and proven to be so.
Heres how a true paranoid chills,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4P3pvKmbsg
Kevin
Profile
Reply
|
Sanchez
Joined:
12-07-2006
Messages: 202
OFF-Line
| Posted 25-05-2008 at 16:41
Quote:
|
On 2008-05-25 15:52, cropredy wrote:
Sanchez,
I cannot even attempt to answer your well thought out and presented points with my usual inane and meandering rantings.
However, I can, as usual attempt to baffle and divert you with some random link from the Inter-web thingy.
Kevinshonestlyrealspirals
You know you're all sheep and we really live in the movie, The Matrix - it was real y'know. I know, my rods tell me, my arms have become rods, I don't need rods anymore, I am the machine. You will be assimilated. Honest!
Kevin
|
|
OK, Kevin, you win. 
Profile
Reply
|
cropredy
Joined:
01-01-2006
Messages: 5525
from Oxon
ON-Line
| Posted 25-05-2008 at 17:25
Sanchez,
Your link, I presume to the borg?, don't want to play, just like you.
One thing about your phychiatric evaluation of myself, and there does seem to be a large herd of such gathering here?
I consider that I am coming out of madness, to the vast majority I suppose the view you express is how they will view us so called Glastonbury types.
I assure you I will look out of place in Glastonbury, but I do feel a good vibe there.
Wacco American sites is a revealing comment also by yourself.
If you were to look at this object, would you think electrical flying machine?, operating in a similer way to the B 2?
I do.
http://www.world-mysteries.com/sar_ironpillar.htp
Kevin
Don't know why that doesn't go direct, but if you press the link on there to strange artifacts and then delhi iron pillar
[ This message was edited by: cropredy on 2008-05-25 17:48 ]
Profile
Reply
|
Sanchez
Joined:
12-07-2006
Messages: 202
OFF-Line
| Posted 27-05-2008 at 08:08
Quote:
|
On 2008-05-25 16:41, Sanchez wrote:
[quote]
On 2008-05-25 15:52, cropredy wrote:
Sanchez,
I cannot even attempt to answer your well thought out and presented points with my usual inane and meandering rantings.
However, I can, as usual attempt to baffle and divert you with some random link from the Inter-web thingy.
Kevinshonestlyrealspirals
You know you're all sheep and we really live in the movie, The Matrix - it was real y'know. I know, my rods tell me, my arms have become rods, I don't need rods anymore, I am the machine. You will be assimilated. Honest!
Kevin
|
|
OK, Kevin, you win.
[/quote]
Quote:
|
On 2008-05-25 17:25, cropredy wrote:
Sanchez,
Your link, I presume to the borg?, don't want to play, just like you.
One thing about your phychiatric evaluation of myself, and there does seem to be a large herd of such gathering here?
I consider that I am coming out of madness, to the vast majority I suppose the view you express is how they will view us so called Glastonbury types.
I assure you I will look out of place in Glastonbury, but I do feel a good vibe there.
Wacco American sites is a revealing comment also by yourself.
If you were to look at this object, would you think electrical flying machine?, operating in a similer way to the B 2?
I do.
http://www.world-mysteries.com/sar_ironpillar.htp
Kevin
Don't know why that doesn't go direct, but if you press the link on there to strange artifacts and then delhi iron pillar
|
|
Quick, someone get the 'Irony Police', we've got an emergency.... 
[ This message was edited by: Sanchez on 2008-05-27 08:09 ]
Profile
Reply
|
cropredy
Joined:
01-01-2006
Messages: 5525
from Oxon
ON-Line
| Posted 27-05-2008 at 10:57
Sanchez,
With reference to this iron pillar, I have thought of what I would presently do with it.
I realise you are an expert in lubrication of tight fitting devices, you never know when such knowledge may be required.
kevin
[ This message was edited by: cropredy on 2008-05-27 11:02 ]
Profile
Reply
|
Sanchez
Joined:
12-07-2006
Messages: 202
OFF-Line
| Posted 27-05-2008 at 11:17
Quote:
|
On 2008-05-27 10:57, cropredy wrote:
Sanchez,
With reference to this iron pillar, I have thought of what I would presently do with it.
I realise you are an expert in lubrication of tight fitting devices, you never know when such knowledge may be required.
kevin
[ This message was edited by: cropredy on 2008-05-27 11:02 ]
|
|
Nice one Kev, I do appreciate clever humour!  However, my original non-return valve is still intact and that particular orifice is 'one way traffic' only!
I did actually look at that link and even THEY say there is a sound, logical reason for it being fairly unaffected by corrosion.
I also followed the link to the Piri-Reis map which is purported to show the shape of Antarctica. I can, as someone who's pet 'anorak' subject is antique cartography that they are waaaay off the mark. It should be obvious even to the layman that the land shown is an extension of South America, not Antarctica.
Piri-Reis
Profile
Reply
|
karloff
Joined:
20-10-2006
Messages: 604
OFF-Line
| Posted 27-05-2008 at 11:28
Quote:
|
On 2008-05-23 14:12, cropredy wrote:
From what I detect, I can follow this duality and deduce how it is operating to a degree.
The whole of creation is in a dense sea of spin charge that is negative ( simply a way of expressing a predominant spin direction viewed from looking down from a northern point of a sphere).
because of a lattice structure of matrix design that encompasses stunning geometry, I can deduce how the incoming flow of negative into the geometry where this spherical planet is formed, is induced as it permeates in spiral fashion through the planet to turn in direction , then exitting as its origonals opposite spin, this is super attractive to the negative and forms a bond with countless negatives eventually forming mass.
That incoming flow or pressure of negatives is what is termed as gravity, a push to the surface area.
That push to the surface area is a mere consequence of the law of attraction of the negative to the positive, and is in my little hobbit opinion the cause of creation.
If you think of this net downward push acting upon say a 200 ton block of stone, that stone will only weigh 200 ton when it is normalised to the electromagnetic field structure existing all about it.
The current B52 bombers utilise this to fly and with little fuel requirements once airborn, they simply iononise the leading edges of the craft to create a positive zone in front of the wings, like a donkey following a carrot, the negative sea of the aether chases towards the positive, thus allowing the craft to move seemingly in near space, it is not moving actually, though to the observer it moves, in fact thwe aether is moving.
You can doubt and argue with that what I post, but do not become simply driven to defend what you consider you KNOW and believe to be correct, all the sheep do that, I recognise in you one that is no sheep.
Access into other dimensions and travel in time are at hand, begin to try and comprehend this, I am.
K.I.S.S
Kevin
|
|
Ok, lets start from the top shall we?
What are the components that make up this negative spin charge?
Are you talking about electron spin charge separation? You seem to be conflating two different terms, I think you just mean charge.
I'll assume you are talking about charged electrons as that is (sort of) the terminology you are applying. If not then my first question is very relevant.
So the whole of creation is negative? Well all electrons are negatively charged but you seem to be stating that this cloud of negative spin electrons spirals around the planet and when it finishes it has reversed direction thereby forming a positive (I presume from you garbled description). Well surely if you spiral anything it stays the same spin direction so how can that create an attracting opposite?
Then (according to you) where these two differently charged electrons meet you get matter? Are you talking about free electrons? Because if so these do not form matter. It is those within an atom that produce atomic bonding and they already have mass (hence the atomic number) so have a physical componant.
Matter is composed of molecules, which are made of atoms bonded together through electrons.
But again what is the solid part of your spin charge?
I am fairly certain you are going to tell me you are not talking about science in this way but a whole new way of thinking. However, you are clearly using (sort of recognisable) scientific terminology so you should be able to answer some queries.
In summary
Why does matter form where a positive and negative meet? What is that matter actually composed of? Why does the "spin charge" reverse in the spiral?
As an aside:
You mean the B2 (not the B52) as that is the plane that some people have claimed uses MHD technology. A B52 is a forty year old basic plane. Further there is no evidence that the B2 spyplane plane uses MHD technology. The only thing used by claimants is a photograph which purports to show ionisation but actually shown a quite normal phenomenon called the Cavitation effect (and is seen when many types of jet plane fly). The same photographs can be taken of F14s or Tornado jets or any other jet plane and does not show ionisation.
However, yet again you have failed to understand basic ideas, even though they have been put forward by alternative/concpiracy theorists like yourself. MHD does not rely on your ideas and does not have any bearing on what you are saying. MHD is based on the principle that some atoms have their own gravitational field. Not at all like your "push" idea.
When gaining knowledge from crappy websites (as they are clearly your knowledge base) I suggest you try thinking and questioning their statements instead of parrot like repeating and sheep like acceptance.
You are showing again your ignorance, and just because you use pseudo scientific terms it does not make you right, just shows up your magpie like stealing of concepts without the intellect to even begin to understand them.
[ This message was edited by: karloff on 2008-05-27 11:29 ]
Profile
Reply
|
cropredy
Joined:
01-01-2006
Messages: 5525
from Oxon
ON-Line
| Posted 27-05-2008 at 15:43
Quote:
|
On 2008-05-27 11:28, karloff wrote:
[quote]
On 2008-05-23 14:12, cropredy wrote:
From what I detect, I can follow this duality and deduce how it is operating to a degree.
The whole of creation is in a dense sea of spin charge that is negative ( simply a way of expressing a predominant spin direction viewed from looking down from a northern point of a sphere).
because of a lattice structure of matrix design that encompasses stunning geometry, I can deduce how the incoming flow of negative into the geometry where this spherical planet is formed, is induced as it permeates in spiral fashion through the planet to turn in direction , then exitting as its origonals opposite spin, this is super attractive to the negative and forms a bond with countless negatives eventually forming mass.
That incoming flow or pressure of negatives is what is termed as gravity, a push to the surface area.
That push to the surface area is a mere consequence of the law of attraction of the negative to the positive, and is in my little hobbit opinion the cause of creation.
If you think of this net downward push acting upon say a 200 ton block of stone, that stone will only weigh 200 ton when it is normalised to the electromagnetic field structure existing all about it.
The current B52 bombers utilise this to fly and with little fuel requirements once airborn, they simply iononise the leading edges of the craft to create a positive zone in front of the wings, like a donkey following a carrot, the negative sea of the aether chases towards the positive, thus allowing the craft to move seemingly in near space, it is not moving actually, though to the observer it moves, in fact thwe aether is moving.
You can doubt and argue with that what I post, but do not become simply driven to defend what you consider you KNOW and believe to be correct, all the sheep do that, I recognise in you one that is no sheep.
Access into other dimensions and travel in time are at hand, begin to try and comprehend this, I am.
K.I.S.S
Kevin
|
|
Ok, lets start from the top shall we?
What are the components that make up this negative spin charge?
Are you talking about electron spin charge separation? You seem to be conflating two different terms, I think you just mean charge.
I'll assume you are talking about charged electrons as that is (sort of) the terminology you are applying. If not then my first question is very relevant.
So the whole of creation is negative? Well all electrons are negatively charged but you seem to be stating that this cloud of negative spin electrons spirals around the planet and when it finishes it has reversed direction thereby forming a positive (I presume from you garbled description). Well surely if you spiral anything it stays the same spin direction so how can that create an attracting opposite?
Then (according to you) where these two differently charged electrons meet you get matter? Are you talking about free electrons? Because if so these do not form matter. It is those within an atom that produce atomic bonding and they already have mass (hence the atomic number) so have a physical componant.
Matter is composed of molecules, which are made of atoms bonded together through electrons.
But again what is the solid part of your spin charge?
I am fairly certain you are going to tell me you are not talking about science in this way but a whole new way of thinking. However, you are clearly using (sort of recognisable) scientific terminology so you should be able to answer some queries.
In summary
Why does matter form where a positive and negative meet? What is that matter actually composed of? Why does the "spin charge" reverse in the spiral?
As an aside:
You mean the B2 (not the B52) as that is the plane that some people have claimed uses MHD technology. A B52 is a forty year old basic plane. Further there is no evidence that the B2 spyplane plane uses MHD technology. The only thing used by claimants is a photograph which purports to show ionisation but actually shown a quite normal phenomenon called the Cavitation effect (and is seen when many types of jet plane fly). The same photographs can be taken of F14s or Tornado jets or any other jet plane and does not show ionisation.
However, yet again you have failed to understand basic ideas, even though they have been put forward by alternative/concpiracy theorists like yourself. MHD does not rely on your ideas and does not have any bearing on what you are saying. MHD is based on the principle that some atoms have their own gravitational field. Not at all like your "push" idea.
When gaining knowledge from crappy websites (as they are clearly your knowledge base) I suggest you try thinking and questioning their statements instead of parrot like repeating and sheep like acceptance.
You are showing again your ignorance, and just because you use pseudo scientific terms it does not make you right, just shows up your magpie like stealing of concepts without the intellect to even begin to understand them.
[ This message was edited by: karloff on 2008-05-27 11:29 ]
[/quote]
Karloff,
You are wonderfully showing how easy it is to get the sheep to believe anything they are told.
nobody has any idea of what the STUFF of creation is, thats why I prefer to call it STUFF.
You have bought the picture painted, then parrot fashion repeat what you are told as fact, electrons, positrons, ballocks.
It is all assumption and presumption, said enough times to lead the sheep into accepting it as fact.
You'll be quoting E=MC2 next, without a blind bit of comprehension of what a guess it is.
They don't know what energy is.
They don't know what matter is.
They don't know what light is.
It is all assumptions, and all based on what others have assumed.
Your stupid carbon 14 dating system that you probabily accept as fact is rubbish.
they have no idea of the condition relevant to any time, this planet may not even have been circling the sun not long ago, but you will accept as fact that the dates given are gospel, because you want to BELIEVE you KNOW.
How can anyone know for certain what the condition upon this planet has been over the past one hundred years, there is no reference data, no method , unless we travel in a time machine.
You need to step back and THINK, not just keep trying to belittle me all the time, it is ludicrous.
You constantly refer to me as special and having superior knowledge etc etc etc, this is clearly your inadequate feelings surfacing, you feel threatened in the safe place you thought was archaeology.
It is all guess work, if the recording was left as that, and no assumption added in it would be fine.
I am constantly learning, and simply passing on what I detect, isn't that what you should be doing?
I have just been into a church at great Tew , it is a St Michaels church, but both male and female flows are present in their, it has four nodal points of input and emitting points into and out of the earth, I don't know what the stuff is, and neither does any other person on this planet.
But I do KNOW how it moves and operates, and I felt fabulous stood on certain points in that church, if you can't experience these flows, tough.
You are constantly trying to portray me as a liar and a host of other bile obnoxious assumptions you have made about me, all based soley on what you read on here, is this how you carry on in your so called PROFFESION, all assumption without actually KNOWING.
This part of the forum is supposed to be about alternative to the accepted, are you so dense as not to be able to understand that?
I am in no way bound by the so called facts of science, but you are zealot like on a mission to try and trip me up with such so called facts.
carry on, because nobody , but nobody actually as any idea about creation , or how life occurs, nobody.
Keep digging up bodies and robbing them of their goods, be a treasure hunter that destroys the evidence , as you dig up without a clue WHY.
Kevin
kevin
Profile
Reply
|
mikecroley
Joined:
27-10-2006
Messages: 1655
OFF-Line
| Posted 27-05-2008 at 16:26
Kev wrote:
You'll be quoting E=MC2 next, without a blind bit of comprehension of what a guess it is.
They don't know what energy is.
They don't know what matter is.
They don't know what light is.
Hi Kev, I couldn't believe you wrote that mate!
Albert was right Kev, E does equal MC2. They? do know what energy is and where the inner light comes from to illuminate the illusion that 'reality' is, mass.
Ask Paulus, Kev, he'll tell you it's true.
mike
Profile
Reply
| |
|
|
IMPORTANT NOTES: This site uses COOKIES. Please do not use this web site if you do not agree to our Terms and Conditions of use.
If you plan to visit ancient sites in person, please make sure you follow our Charter.
Articles, photographs and comments are the property of their respective authors or contributors, please contact them for permission to reproduce. Site design ©1997-2012 Andy Burnham.
|
Main News