While space is a lie and we live inside an artificial nickle-iron dome that keeps the water out. I'm unable to debunk the claim that aliens tunnel up from underground.... "There's a war under there and it's been going on since that time," he said. He spoke of 1,477 underground bases around the world, 129 of which were located in the United States. Each cost $17 billion or more. He said the Black Budget, hidden from other U.S. government agencies and from the public, garners 25 percent of the gross national product. Military forces from multiple countries have been engaged in such warfare with aliens, he said. -- The Epoch Times source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/roadtrippers/that-time-subterranean-al_b_5182945.html
|
|
|
For me the price will be below $400 after christmas ends. The price now still stable until 25 after that the price will become low..
Short BTC much?
|
|
|
Manual transmission FTW.
edit:
I just watched the video OMG LOL.
|
|
|
I have irrefutable proof that the Earth is motionless. This proof is derived from an experiment conducted in 1871 by Sir George Biddell Airy. Instead of a wall of text I present a video production describing the setup and experiment known as "Airy's Failure": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=87M2i61N1cUAs you can see the experiment is simple and straightforward and the results cannot be denied; the Stars are moving and the Earth is stationary.
|
|
|
Bitcoin is global, yes, but it's a fucking horrible currency! As it gains value, it encourages hoarding (HODLING) and thus people never use it.
what is really discouraging the usage of bitcoin is acceptance which is very restricted nowadays, nothing else, the deflationary system is perfect better than the inflationary crap that fiat is sustaining It is pretty sad when I see the inflation is good for currency myth propagated, even between economists. For sure inflation is good for the ones in debt, thus ideal for governments ! But for savers, inflation is terrible and deflation suits them much better. So you have two sides here and saying one is better for currency is ridicilous. By the way, Bitcoin solve this because the final supply is constant, not increasing or decreasing.I'm not sure if that's correct; given an infinite amount of time the Bitcoin supply would approach 0 as all the private keys are lost or destroyed. This however isn't a problem as a single satoshi can be infinitely subdivided to meet demand.
|
|
|
So basically this thread was created to make fun of the absurd idea that solar panels will drain the sun. Clearly those responsible for this towns anti-solar policy don't actually believe this and have financial or political motivation.
The problem here is that the OP is throwing stones while living in glass house as his claimed beliefs regarding the sun are just as absurd and ridiculous. In fact the OP's situation is even worse as he a actually believes the earth is in motion around the sun and isn't just just pushing a political/financial agenda.
|
|
|
The globe earth is a fake, a fraud and a farce.
|
|
|
Fusion would be as big a disaster at this point as adding sugar to a vat of bacteria. Human populations would explode and devastate the earth. I suspect that fusion is fairly well developed in certain circles and I've heard (on this board I think) of reports of it coming to the fore out of China or Russia or both. 'We' need a one-world government with proven methods of population control before the Kracken can be released. Of course such a construct could be useful for a wide variety of enterprises as well. That's slop people aren't bacteria, this is typical elitist propaganda.
|
|
|
I believe there's plenty of conventional (solar, wind, water, thermal) ways of harnessing free energy, if we go down that road first then opposition, disinformation, etc.. to the more exotic technologies will fade.
|
|
|
Going over that site it seems a bit "off", researching Leedskalnin's work is defiantly a step in the right direction.
|
|
|
What's this got to do with your OP? I'm not seeing how drones are connected to free energy.
|
|
|
Free energy is for real but, I call bullshit on this one; controlled opposition IMO.
|
|
|
The Earth is not a globe.
|
|
|
I acknowledge that we live in an imperfect world it's you that's in denial. You're materialist views are a fallacy, Plato despite being a flat-headed goldbricking scumbag is correct in regards to the subjective nature of the universe. You obviously didn't pay attention during theology class. This being the case it looks like you need some spoon-feeding: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_FormsA simple, basic word for theory is fiction. Speed of light is a constant here on earth according to observations here on earth. Speed of light in space as we understand it is based on the operation of the universe as standard physics sees the universe. Speed of light in space when based on flat earth physics is different than what it is based on standard physics, just as flat earth is different from round earth. The blue light you see in that reactor underwater is called "Cherenkov radiation" and it's caused by charged particles breaking the light barrier; an illuminated sonic boom so-to-speak. Allow me to quote: "While electrodynamics holds that the speed of light in a vacuum is a universal constant (c), the speed at which light propagates in a material may be significantly less than c. For example, the speed of the propagation of light in water is only 0.75c. Matter can be accelerated beyond this speed (although still to less than c) during nuclear reactions and in particle accelerators. Cherenkov radiation results when a charged particle, most commonly an electron, travels through a dielectric (electrically polarizable) medium with a speed greater than that at which light would otherwise propagate in the same medium." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherenkov_radiation
|
|
|
Bad if you want to claim the speed of light is the same in all mediums then you need to go join your buddies who say solar panels will drain the sun and kill all the plants.
There's no new physics here it's an established irrefutable fact that the speed of light depends on the medium it's traveling through.
The stars are moving and the earth is motionless, case closed.
Case not closed. Speed of light is irrelevant. Action of light traveling through a particular medium as opposed to some other medium is irrelevant. The thing that rules is the action of light through the ether... or through space if you want to believe in space rather than the ether. ---------- The difference in the speed of light in air vs. water is the entire basis of Airy's experiment. It was intended as an experiment to test the æther but in this case we're appropriating it to determine weather it's the stars or the earth that's in motion and the results are irrefutable; the stars are in motion and and the earth is stationary. Physics is flawed. It is flawed because basic math is flawed. For example, 1 + 1 never equals 2. Why not? Because there are no two things that are exactly the same. They are always at least a little different. Because of this, 1 + 1 will always equal 1 + 1... never 2.
When you consider this, the deeper you get into any form of physics, the greater will become the flaw. This is part of the reason why standard physics has more and greater holes in it as you apply greater math to describing that physics. Certainly the physics itself doesn't have any holes. It is the description of physics that produces understandings that are flaw, because the description is based on the flawed language of mathematics as it exists.
----------
The symbol "1" points to the number 1 i.e. the symbol "1" is not the number. Numbers are perfect, they can never be created, destroyed or modified in any way and they exist outside of space and time. 1 + 1 will = 2 every time, math is the only science where you can be 100% sure of the results. ...snip... All right. Either you do not understand, or you simply do not want to acknowledge. I acknowledge that we live in an imperfect world it's you that's in denial. You're materialist views are a fallacy, Plato despite being a flat-headed goldbricking scumbag is correct in regards to the subjective nature of the universe. You obviously didn't pay attention during theology class. This being the case it looks like you need some spoon-feeding: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_Forms
|
|
|
Bad if you want to claim the speed of light is the same in all mediums then you need to go join your buddies who say solar panels will drain the sun and kill all the plants.
There's no new physics here it's an established irrefutable fact that the speed of light depends on the medium it's traveling through.
The stars are moving and the earth is motionless, case closed.
Case not closed. Speed of light is irrelevant. Action of light traveling through a particular medium as opposed to some other medium is irrelevant. The thing that rules is the action of light through the ether... or through space if you want to believe in space rather than the ether. ---------- The difference in the speed of light in air vs. water is the entire basis of Airy's experiment. It was intended as an experiment to test the æther but in this case we're appropriating it to determine weather it's the stars or the earth that's in motion and the results are irrefutable; the stars are in motion and and the earth is stationary. Physics is flawed. It is flawed because basic math is flawed. For example, 1 + 1 never equals 2. Why not? Because there are no two things that are exactly the same. They are always at least a little different. Because of this, 1 + 1 will always equal 1 + 1... never 2.
When you consider this, the deeper you get into any form of physics, the greater will become the flaw. This is part of the reason why standard physics has more and greater holes in it as you apply greater math to describing that physics. Certainly the physics itself doesn't have any holes. It is the description of physics that produces understandings that are flaw, because the description is based on the flawed language of mathematics as it exists.
----------
The symbol "1" points to the number 1 i.e. the symbol "1" is not the number. Numbers are perfect, they can never be created, destroyed or modified in any way and they exist outside of space and time. 1 + 1 will = 2 every time, math is the only science where you can be 100% sure of the results. ...snip...
|
|
|
Bad if you want to claim the speed of light is the same in all mediums then you need to go join your buddies who say solar panels will drain the sun and kill all the plants.
There's no new physics here it's an established irrefutable fact that the speed of light depends on the medium it's traveling through.
The stars are moving and the earth is motionless, case closed.
|
|
|
The Earth is not a spinning globe and the Airy's Failure proves it beyond a reasonable doubt.
|
|
|
Answer my fucking question how does the "Airy's Failure" fail?
What does sex have to do with it? All right, all right. Airy's Failure fails because nobody takes into account that the ether penetrates right down through the center of the earth. The density of the water related to the air makes such a tiny amount of difference with regard to light traveling through the ether from great distances, that the failure of Airy's Failure is due to the ether effect acting throughout all mediums, even solid earth. Only within the center of a black hole or some similarly dense object is there enough ether loss that something like Aries Failure might be proven true. Check your facts, the difference in the speed of light in air vs. water is considerable. Speed of light in air: 299,700 km/s Speed of light in water: 225,070 km/s The speed of light in various mediums doesn't have anything to do with it. The thing that controls is the differences in the ether in different mediums. In other words, the ether acts differently in such a way that it "tricks" one into thinking that there is a difference in the way that light acts as it passes through different mediums of different densities. If you are going to consider the ether, you have to consider it all the way. You can't simply say that there is ether and that it is the density of water vs. the density of air that makes the difference, when all along it is the activity of the ether that is giving a false reading. We simply don't know enough about the ether and how it acts and reacts. Because of what it might be, the ether that is located at the surface of the earth might actually cause a real reaction on the ether multitudes of light years away when it is disturbed here. Airy's failure was not a failure. It simply proved something completely different than Airy or anybody else generally considers... elasticity and reactivity of the ether. Nothing to do with it? The whole fucking experiment is based on the difference in the speed of light in air vs. water.
|
|
|
|