Correct. They are pictures of contrails.
Yep, right up there with Leprechauns, Flat Earth, and Space/Moon Hoax. You are in good company.
Oh, yeah. This is how the "undoctrinated" (read: uneducated) talk to those who have expertise. Paint with a broad brush, and never have any basis to what you say. I have a BSc, MSc, and MAA in aeronautics and astronautics and worked at Boeing Aerospace for 40 years as a senior systems design engineer. I can only imagine you are expert at being a janitor, since you do not offer any credentials.
But the vacuity of your response comes from the hostility you demonstrate towards source works of ACTUAL path-breaking thinking. The fact that you can think a recommendation is a sentence of indoctrination just shows how reflexively closed-minded YOU are.
Since there is no possibility of you even being able to make such a statement (since it is not true), I wonder why you make it. Is it some kind of unthinking writer's spasm? You can ask the admins, if they allow such a question to be asked.
I can't believe you guys. He gets kicked out of Russia and Iran (making the right enemies). And you think the Macron government in France are White Hats, and dream up a fantasy of his guilt? As though fantasies were realities? I wouldn't want such prejudicial trigger-pullers on any jury before me.
Quite a collection of points. I doubt there is a drug cocktail that authentically restores lost cognition. It would need to be capable of reconstructing nerve pathways, and would be worth a Nobel Prize. He was simply too far gone to save.
Kamala will try to cheat, but her recent performance indicates she cannot add 2 + 2 on the fly, even when the interlocutor is holding up 4 fingers. If she tries to lip-synch to a prompter, it will sound unnatural as hell. And she is so scatterbrained, I doubt she would have the good sense to avoid extemporaneous comments.
If Trump is clever (and he might be), the useful strategy might be a kind of Socratic dialogue that walks her off the plank. Or causes her to halt with the "Tilt!" sign flashing. People tend to underestimate Trump in accordance to their own conceptions of intellectual combat, and they forget that Trump's model of combat is not chess. It is boxing. I somewhat expect he will contrive a mental box that will cause Harris to lose her composure.
"Democratic process" = process of Democrats
"Democracy" = government by Democrats ("If we've got the votes---however we got them---we can do absolutely anything we want to whomever we want.")
"We must be democratic about this" = "Shut the fuck up, or we'll beat the snot out of you."
"The people have spoken" = rape, pillage, assault, murder, arson, vandalism.
I have read books on Tesla, with admiration and some understanding, since I have a 50-year background in aerospace engineering. i am by no means close-minded, but I do have a realistic perspective. i "bother" coming into threads like this because I am dissatisfied with people getting all worked up over the kind and speed of sleigh that Santa Claus rides in.
There is never any new evidence to consider. The whole field of quantum physics, semiconductors, and lasers emerged and elaborated entirely outside of Tesla's thinking. So, it is evidence that he surely didn't think of everything. And just because he was right about rotating electric fields doesn't prove he is right about anything else. It is a logical fallacy to believe so. (He totally discounted quantum physics, which goes to show how close-minded and incorrect he could be.)
Here you claim that the product of Tesla's dreams is not grandiose nonsense. You saying so is at least grandiose nonsense. I've had dreams, too. None of them have come real.
What wireless power system? There is simply no evidence of anything working. The Wardenclyffe tower was never explained by Tesla and he was never able to bring it to fruition. It died in obscurity. Tesla was not able to convince his benefactor to keep pouring money into it. The benefactor was open-minded enough and respectful of Tesla enough to start the project---but Tesla was at a loss for words to justify any further investment. His fault, not the benefactor's.
Yeah, the sun is powered by thermonuclear reactions. The theory explains a whole lot of astronomic physics. It also has electrical properties, best explained by Laszlo Kortvelyessy in his book, "The Electric Universe." How would I have known that book unless I was open-minded? How are you going to understand that book if you don't have an education in physics?
In the end, you don't have any information to offer by way of defense or persuasion. All you have is bad-mouthing and names. That tells the story.
Please name some of "these technologies." The way we have such things for 50+ years is because they have been available for 50+ years, and we know about them.
I can't stomach a 5-hour video, so I looked at the PowerPoint presentation. As usual, a picture needs a thousand words of explanation (that is really what the old saying means) and the explanation was missing. He seems to have stumbled across another version of "pushing" gravity, where things are pushed together by the pressure of the surrounding medium and the mutual blockage of that pressure by shadowing. The astronomer Tom van Flandern was a proponent of that theory. It has some credence due to its similarity to the known mechanism of the Casimir force (mutual shielding from excluded virtual photons).
He derives some intriguing results from quantum theory, but his experimental method leaves many questions open, as he does not account for the Earth's permanent magnetic and electric fields. It would be expectable that electromagnetic field generation would interact with these fields. Using a balloon to balance the device is unexpected, particularly if he must take pains to exclude breezes. One might have supposed conducing the experiment in a vacuum enclosure with a scale balance to magnify any alterations in weight. Exclusion of subtle environmental interactions has been the bane and headache of most experiments in related phenomena (e.g., reactionless thrust). And while near-field effects might be justified, the demonstrated far-field effect of gravity is not so easily explained. It this effect is real, then one might suppose there would be a similar effect from the universal background radiation, but no one has offered any evidence of that.
Yes, aside from the energy requirements of converting mass to energy and back again, there is also the massive problem of reconstituting the information by which the particles are rearranged to duplicate the original object. Don't try it on anything living, however.
Evidence? This is a complete fantasy. No artifacts, documentation, testimony, or witnesses. They spent money on the V-2 and stumbled over making an atomic bomb.
Long ago. Molt Taylor produced his Aerocar, approved by the government for production and operation on road and air, in 1949. Earlier efforts date back to 1937 and before. All this seems new when you don't know the history.
No rational objection to being approved for operations on both ground and air. Do you want the vehicle to be a crappy car, and/or a crappy airplane?
And Tesla had no flying machine. Nothing easier than to talk about than dreams. Tesla was a great inventor, and his inventions are firmly within the laws of physics, but he was also a grandiose self-promoter. Many of his prophecies came to nothing.
The F-117 and B-2 are far from triangles. You would have better luck with the F-102 and F-106, which had delta wings. And they are all far from UFOs. The projected A-12 Avenger II "flying dorito" was a literal triangle (but was never built).
An absolute big nothing. Only rumor and speculation. I read a book all about it, and it came down to hints, "someone said," and sheer fantasy. No photos. No diagrams. No reports. No witnesses.
From Wikipedia (so corrupt, they even falsify raw data, right?):
"In 2021, a study by Cambridge University determined that Bitcoin (at 121 terawatt-hours per year) used more electricity than Argentina (at 121TWh) and the Netherlands (109TWh). According to Digiconomist, one bitcoin transaction required 708 kilowatt-hours of electrical energy, the amount an average U.S. household consumed in 24 days."
"By 2022, the University of Cambridge and Digiconomist estimated that the two largest proof-of-work blockchains, Bitcoin and Ethereum, together used twice as much electricity in one year as the whole of Sweden..."
They started out at zero.
Prove me wrong. I consistently provide correct information from a relevant specialty. You have credential hatred because you have no credentials yourself. Plus, you get distraught over a matter that should be discussed rationally, and abusive besides.