![]() |
JFK Admits in secret OVal Office Recording...Moon landing was FAKE
On Jun 8, 2:18*am, wrote:
On Jun 8, 1:00*am, Olrik wrote: On 2011-06-07 14:09, John Smith wrote: On 6/7/2011 10:31 AM, Bob Casanova wrote: ... Perhaps you should read his words again so you could begin to understand that the "gravitational ether" was a convenient way to think of the deformation of spacetime by matter and energy, not a physical medium such as was demonstrated to be nonexistent by Michaelson and Morley (and others). And this is neither a tangent nor a circle; it's the heart of the matter. Einstein considers it un-ponderable, he claims to NOT understand the properties of ether, he indicates, at this present time, we can attempt to observe how in "interacts" with our matter to deduce its' properties. However, without a doubt, its' ability to support the propagation of light (and therefore RF) is a given fact ... You simply attempt to stick your ideas, visions, opinion of what ether is and have Einstein take the blame for it. And, an excellent example of the tangents and circle you navigate with your spin-doctoring ... It is both my opinion and observation that there is some kinda of interaction with ether and metal antennas (and other conductive substances, elements.) It is here that RF "rings" the ether and begins the propagation of the RF wave/particles ... the experts approach this is a much more subtle manner than the words I choose. I'll nominate you for a Nobel Prize in physics for 2012. You just proved, without a doubt, that satellite TV and GPS receivers do not work as advertised! Bravo!- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Well,well,well . What about all the contraptions (thousands of them ) that are littering the space around the Solar System ? Some of these buggers were launched 20-30 years ago . And they ALL communicate (unless they broke down) with ground control through empty space . Many millions of miles away . Yes sir . . .- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Try billions of miles for the Voyagers, still calling home every day. |
JFK Admits in secret OVal Office Recording...Moon landing wasFAKE
On 6/7/2011 1:33 PM, Bob Casanova wrote:
I think Einstein, absolutely, considered a unbelievably intelligent creator a strong possibility! Even if I concede that is what Einstein meant, (I don't) all that does is move the goalpost...Who created the creator? To me, anyone who is capable of free thought and is intellectually honest will admit that they just don't know the answer to the question of what started everything. To say 'god did it', is just giving up. Correct. And unlike organized religion, science has no problem with admitting lack of knowledge, or with research to discover reality. How's that old saying go? "Science asks questions that may never be answered, religion has answers that may never be questioned". Ya, that's it. -- "OK you ****s, let's see what you can do now" -Hit Girl http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjO7kBqTFqo |
JFK Admits in secret OVal Office Recording...Moon landing wasFAKE
On 6/7/2011 1:37 PM, Bob Casanova wrote:
LOL...My youngest daughter recently announced to me that she was a Buddhist. She claimed it wasn't a religion. I asked her if the Buddha had superpowers. She said that he did. I suspect that she's confused. No superpowers (AFAIK) are ascribed to Guatama by Buddhism; he was an enlightened teacher, not a deity. I thought Buddha flew around...No? Also, didn't he sit under a tree a long time? Like, a REAL long time? -- "OK you ****s, let's see what you can do now" -Hit Girl http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjO7kBqTFqo |
JFK Admits in secret OVal Office Recording...Moon landing wasFAKE
On 6/7/2011 1:37 PM, Bob Casanova wrote:
I suspect that she's confused. No superpowers (AFAIK) are ascribed to Guatama by Buddhism; he was an enlightened teacher, not a deity. Another thing about Buddha....Didn't he run out on his wife and infant son to hang out with his buddies ? I'm just saying...... -- "OK you ****s, let's see what you can do now" -Hit Girl http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjO7kBqTFqo |
JFK Admits in secret OVal Office Recording...Moon landing wasFAKE
On 6/8/2011 2:24 AM, HVAC wrote:
... How's that old saying go? "Science asks questions that may never be answered, religion has answers that may never be questioned". Ya, that's it. Sounds about right, they are of differing purposes, one to deduce and understand the mind of the creator and the laws he established in the universe. The other a set of rules and commandments meant to establish order over successful societies. -- Regards, JS “The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it’s an instrument for the people to restrain the government.” -- Patrick Henry |
JFK Admits in secret OVal Office Recording...Moon landing was FAKE
John Smith wrote:
On 6/8/2011 3:19 PM, Bob Casanova wrote: On Tue, 07 Jun 2011 11:16:02 -0700, the following appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by John : On 6/7/2011 10:48 AM, Bob Casanova wrote: ... Diety? Same circle? Again? Isn't "deity" the equivalent of "God?" Is it? Is Thor "God"? How about Shiva? Zeus? Do you wish to purchase a clue? snip transference idiocy Again, I tied "deity" to "creator" and "God", and took it for granted I would be speaking who are rooted in reality ... Reality is the belief by millions, past and present, in the existence of thousands of deities, most whom aren't referred to as "God". Language isn't your first language, is it? If the set of false-pseudo-deities are thrown in, we are back again to your attempting to go out on tangents and run back to the same religious focus at the center of most of your post ... Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle... As always, the "God" is the creator which we were discussing, before your erratic changes in tangents and your circles of thought and text, was, and, is the creator mentioned by Einstein. Except for the minor fact that Einstein didnt believe in "God" and said so many times. Keith |
JFK Admits in secret OVal Office Recording...Moon landing wasFAKE
On 6/8/2011 3:17 PM, Bob Casanova wrote:
On Tue, 07 Jun 2011 11:12:11 -0700, the following appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by John : On 6/7/2011 10:25 AM, Bob Casanova wrote: ... I ascribe no such properties to the vacuum; the properties are those of EM radiation, which requires no medium for propagation; in fact, any such medium, from air to glass, slows the apparent velocity of such radiation. Only in a vacuum is it equal to c. You seem to consistently miss this point. ... Yes, as you have consistently done, present your personal beliefs and opinions, attempt to spin-doctor what others have said, deny the wave/particle theory, etc. I have done none of these. It's a fact (observed and tested many times) that EM radiation requires no propagation medium, and wave-particle duality (which I don't deny, regardless of your unsupported assertion to the contrary) has absolutely zero to do with that fact. Insane, buy hey, it is a free country ... Oh, the irony... Pointing out that you are claiming exactly opposite to all recognized and accepted laws of physics pertaining to the theory of relativity and established by Einstein is in error? Only if you have not read the links which contain Einsteins exact words .... the power of morons to deny the truth has never been questioned, and you give an excellent example of it. So, we are done, you simply came to deny the truths -- you could have saved us all a lot of trouble by being honest right up front ... -- Regards, JS “The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it’s an instrument for the people to restrain the government.” -- Patrick Henry |
JFK Admits in secret OVal Office Recording...Moon landing wasFAKE
On 6/8/2011 4:09 PM, Keith Willshaw wrote:
John Smith wrote: On 6/8/2011 3:19 PM, Bob Casanova wrote: On Tue, 07 Jun 2011 11:16:02 -0700, the following appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by John : On 6/7/2011 10:48 AM, Bob Casanova wrote: ... Diety? Same circle? Again? Isn't "deity" the equivalent of "God?" Is it? Is Thor "God"? How about Shiva? Zeus? Do you wish to purchase a clue? snip transference idiocy Again, I tied "deity" to "creator" and "God", and took it for granted I would be speaking who are rooted in reality ... Reality is the belief by millions, past and present, in the existence of thousands of deities, most whom aren't referred to as "God". Language isn't your first language, is it? If the set of false-pseudo-deities are thrown in, we are back again to your attempting to go out on tangents and run back to the same religious focus at the center of most of your post ... Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle... As always, the "God" is the creator which we were discussing, before your erratic changes in tangents and your circles of thought and text, was, and, is the creator mentioned by Einstein. Except for the minor fact that Einstein didnt believe in "God" and said so many times. Keith You have ADHD too? Einstein believed in a creator, the links have been posted, anyone, and with a simple google search, can confirm that. You simply want to have a religious argument centered around some specific religion, or religions, beliefs ... I don't see anyone here who has an interest in discussing religion in place of hard physics. Perhaps your revelations and epiphanies on God would be better appreciated elsewhere? Regards, JS -- Regards, JS “The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it’s an instrument for the people to restrain the government.” -- Patrick Henry |
JFK Admits in secret OVal Office Recording...Moon landing wasFAKE
On 6/8/2011 6:52 PM, John Smith wrote:
LOL! That's funny dude. You really, truly believe that some unknown entity 'created' the universe? Really? So, who created him? Haven't you ever thought this through? Did you just wake up? Did you just become aware we don't even know what properties the ether has? And we don't know what properties your god has. Coincidence? I think not. Do you really think we have not been considering the properties of the creator of the universe also? Again, there is zero evidence for ether and zero evidence for god. Coincidence? I think not. -- "OK you ****s, let's see what you can do now" -Hit Girl http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjO7kBqTFqo |
JFK Admits in secret OVal Office Recording...Moon landing wasFAKE
On 6/8/2011 6:55 PM, John Smith wrote:
Interesting new tact That would probably be "tack", O Wise One: "tact (t²kt) n. 1. Acute sensitivity to what is proper and appropriate in dealing with others, including the ability to speak or act without offending." "tack1 (t²k) n. ... 1. Nautical. a. To change the direction or course of a vessel: ready to tack on the captain's signal. b. To change tack: The ship tacked to starboard. 2. To change one's course of action. [Middle English tak, fastener, from Old North French taque, probably of Germanic origin.]" If not, thanks for the compliment. , you have tossed in, agree with what I am pointing out and, yet, claim it is differing ... still, just a version of the strawman argument ... how limited ... Do you have the faintest idea what you think you're talking about? You mean, you are still unaware that, the courses (directions for you) of your text appear to take the paths of a drunken sailor walking them? Zigzags, circles, tangents, etc.? Dream on ... it is plain to see ... John... You made a mistake. Admit it and move on. -- "OK you ****s, let's see what you can do now" -Hit Girl http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjO7kBqTFqo |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:37 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com