Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

Pilots For 9/11 Truth Forum _ Alternative Theories _ 9/11: John Lear - Disinformation? Cia Operative?

Posted by: rob balsamo Aug 19 2009, 10:07 PM

Another chat between Rob Balsamo and John Lear, Son of the Learjet and Core Member of Pilots For 9/11 Truth, answering the questions of those who refuse to ask him directly. Topics include CIA work, Iran-Contra, "Truth Movement" division, "Impossible Speeds", NTSB Data, and "No Plane Theories"... among other topics.
Please visit pilotsfor911truth.org for more information.




Posted by: painter Aug 20 2009, 01:07 AM

Thanks for doing this and putting it up, Rob. Lear is clearly one of the most remarkable and interesting people alive on this planet. I have the utmost respect for him -- but that doesn't mean I necessarily "believe" some of the things he says just because he says them. I don't think he would want anyone to do that, anyway.

Some of our detractors like to couch the "John Lear issue" as a matter of credibility. The idea being that since Lear has some very unconventional views, his support is a potential weakness that could be exploited, especially by unfriendly media, as further evidence that the 9/11 truth movement are a bunch of nutters not to be taken seriously. Aside from the fact that the corporate owned media is not likely to EVER take this movement "seriously," the problem here is that these same people aren't addressing the evidence that Pilots for Truth and Citizen Investigation Team has uncovered and made public. Instead they prefer to adopt a logical fallacy that insists if John Lear (or someone like him) supports this evidence, then this evidence must be false. Thus, in a twist of logic that goes beyond ironic, they do the very thing they say they're afraid the "John Lear issue" will do: Discredit by association.

MEANWHILE, analysis of the NTSB supplied FDR data allegedly from Flight 77 shows that it could not have hit the Pentagon. Aerodynamically impossible. This is clear, take it to the judge, evidence of a cover-up and falsification of evidence supplied to the public via FOIA by government agencies (NTSB and FBI). MEANWHILE we have numerous verified on the record and on the scene eye witnesses who corroborate one another in having seen a plane on a flight path, bank angle and air speed that is irreconcilable with the physical damage. MEANWHILE we have one on the scene taxi driver with a busted windshield and punctured back seat whose initial story stretches credulity to the breaking point followed by a complete denial of his having ever been in the precise location necessary for his initial story to even be remotely possible. MEANWHILE we have a Pentagon police officer reporting that immediately after the explosion at the Pentagon he saw a low flying "commercial airliner" flying over the South parking lot. MEANWHILE we have a bunch of people who claim to be advocates for 9/11 truth who can't wrap their heads around all this, preferring instead to continue to insist that, despite all this evidence, the official account of Flight 77 must be true and, instead, prefer to demonize the people and organizations that have worked diligently for years to gather this information and make it public. And these same people want to hang their arguments on issues of credibility??

whistle.gif

Posted by: albertchampion Aug 20 2009, 01:15 AM

thank you, rob. for that interview. and for putting faces up.

i don't question many of john lear's bona fides. i still have what i think was his dad's original invention, the portable radio for lightplane pilots.

but since john says that he was flying for an outfit prop during what has become known as iran-contra, do you think he could tell us what american corporation furnished the gulfstream to rich secord, albert hakim, manuchar ghorbanifar[aka the enterprise].....the aircraft that flew ollie and bud mcfarland to tehran with the cake and the bible?

i know the answer. does he?

does anyone on this board?

Posted by: Trapster Aug 20 2009, 10:40 PM

Be very weary of Lear.

He is a dis-info specialist. He does work for the CIA. He has off the wall theories about UFO's (dis-info put out by the CIA to hide the real truth about UFO's, that they are man-made). Anything you say to him, anything that you give him goes straight to the CIA. Not that they don't already know who we are.

Watch it with Lear. It's called 'Poisoning the well'; that is, inserting bad info into a body of good info as to 'poison' the entire body of info. Aka, a little poison kills the entire well.

Once CIA, always CIA

Posted by: rob balsamo Aug 20 2009, 11:03 PM

Trap,

Did you listen to the interview? We discuss his "work" for the CIA. He never worked for the CIA. He worked for an airline which was contracted by the CIA. Many airlines today are contracted by the CIA for various reasons which are very overt. Does that mean all their pilots are CIA operatives?

Do you have any evidence that John Lear is a CIA Op? If so, please provide it. So far you havent provided anything but your belief he is CIA due to his UFO Research.

Also, Lear has no intention of "poisoning the well". You'd know this if you listen to the interview.

Posted by: aerohead Aug 21 2009, 09:05 PM

Excellent interview.

And i feel much better about John Lear now.
If he backs the work done here, then he's ok
in my book. Where we get into trouble is when
we create our own theories without alot of proof
but some possibility. I know this first hand with
my F-4 theory whistle.gif laughing1.gif

But it was good to here John support Pilots and
the movement. Excellent


-Aero

Posted by: Trapster Aug 21 2009, 10:55 PM

Ok, here we go.

1) Yes, I did listen to the interview. Twice.

2) I think Lear makes it clear as to how involved with the CIA he is. He took part in some real clandestine ops. Flying recon planes into secret bases in Laos, taking part in some Iran-Contra missions in the early 80's and taking part in some other very secret missions across the Middle East in the 70's and avoiding Soviet 'contact'.

Do you think a guy who flies these missions does NOT have some very high CIA clearances?

He says they have no 'folder' on him. Well, how would he know? He may not have been a top level trained Operative, but he sure did mesh with some of the Highest Level CIA operations with his skill set as a pilot. I will leave you to do the math and critical thinking on this.

3) John Lear has some strange theories on the whole UFO/NASA/Moon/et al. Check out this link: http://www.thelivingmoon.com/47john_lear/menu.html#Photo

He believes that the moon has a very thin atmosphere. No it does not. There is strange crystal structure on the moon. There are some interesting theories about what this may be. Instead, on a radio show, Lear says this may be a 'well of souls' of sorts. A totally off the wall theory that distracts from the more plausible theories. I'd call that Poisoning the Well, dis-info. Which gets us to:

4) Correct me if I'm wrong, but, does Lear theorize that it was holograms that hit the WTC? Seriously.

This is the kind of off the wall theories that bring discredit to the 'Truth' movement, and yes, it does poison the well of truth. Just like what one would expect from a CIA dis-info expert.

Rob,
I am one of the 'Black T-shirt wearing' people who shout "9/11 Was an Inside Job". I have worn my Lose Change 'Investigate 9/11' black T-shirt at Ground Zero on the 11th of September since 2006. I will be there in less than a month this year. I save the shouting for the street action we do in NYC around the anniversary; at Times Square and such.

I strongly believe that 9/11 was an Inside Job. In fact, this was confirmed to me by Pilot's member Dr. Bob Bowman. He told me the whole USAF story of their inability to intercept the hijacked jets story was bunk.

My suggestion is to really stay away from the 'no planes' theory, or theories. They are the weakest evidence in taking down the Official Theory.

Instead, as a pilot and with other pilots, explain how there is no way that those cockpits could have been over taken by hijackers armed with box cutters, after the FAA issued a warning to all aircraft just after 8:20am, before at least two of the other jets were hijacked. Focus on how hard it would be for a novice to simply keep control of a jetliner, much less navigate to NYC from Ohio or hit the Pentagon flying level into the side wall. That's your unique perspective and skill set to the 'Truth Movement'.

Keep fighting the Good Fight,
Trap

Posted by: rob balsamo Aug 21 2009, 11:20 PM

QUOTE (Trapster @ Aug 21 2009, 10:55 PM) *
Ok, here we go.

1) Yes, I did listen to the interview. Twice.


Clearly you havent. You may have 'heard' the interview "twice", but clearly you didnt listen.

Ok... here we go.

QUOTE
2) I think Lear makes it clear as to how involved with the CIA he is. He took part in some real clandestine ops.


If you listened to the interview, you would know he flew Cessna's from Wichita to SE Asia because the CIA couldnt get a boat to do it. So, the CIA started an airline as cover at the time, Lear was hired by that airline to fly Cessna's across the "pond". Yes, it was probably "covert" in the 60's so he didnt get shot down, but im sure you can google it now. Lear gives the name of the airline.

QUOTE
Flying recon planes into secret bases in Laos, taking part in some Iran-Contra missions in the early 80's


Again, if you listened to the interview, you would know that Lear never had a chance to fly any mission for "Iran-Contra" as the Russians shot down one of the planes over Russian territory. Im sure you can google this as well. Full sources are given including the name of the airline.

QUOTE
and taking part in some other very secret missions across the Middle East in the 70's and avoiding Soviet 'contact'.


The only time he "avoided USSR contact" is when he was told he will not fly. See reply above.

QUOTE
Do you think a guy who flies these missions does NOT have some very high CIA clearances?


Do you have evidence that Lear or any pilot flying today for an airline contracted by the CIA has "CIA Clearances"? And even if they do, are they all big bad boogie men?

QUOTE
He says they have no 'folder' on him. Well, how would he know? He may not have been a top level trained Operative, but he sure did mesh with some of the Highest Level CIA operations with his skill set as a pilot. I will leave you to do the math and critical thinking on this.


When Lear claims the CIA has "no folder on him", he is saying that he has no EMPLOYEE folder with the CIA. In other words, he wasnt employed directly by the CIA. The airline he worked for was contracted by the CIA. Why is this so hard for you to understand?

QUOTE
3) John Lear has some strange theories on the whole UFO/NASA/Moon/et al. Check out this link: http://www.thelivingmoon.com/47john_lear/menu.html#Photo


No one disputes John Lear has some "far out" theories. I even said it in the interview, if you listened. Clearly you havent.

QUOTE
This is the kind of off the wall theories that bring discredit to the 'Truth' movement,


Again, if you listen to the interview, Lear specifically says that if he is ever called upon to speak for P4T or the "Truth Movement" by mainstream media, he will defer it to me. Try actually listening to the interview.

By the way, who dictates who can speak out about 9/11? You? Do we live in America? You familiar with the 1st Amendment?

QUOTE
Rob,
I am one of the 'Black T-shirt wearing' people who shout "9/11 Was an Inside Job". I have worn my Lose Change 'Investigate 9/11' black T-shirt at Ground Zero on the 11th of September since 2006. I will be there in less than a month this year. I save the shouting for the street action we do in NYC around the anniversary; at Times Square and such.


I wont be standing beside you, nor will any of our professional aviators.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/core

Our activism is filling out affidavits and putting our faces to our names with experience (see link above)... instead of coming across as some extreme fringe angry group.

But thats just my opinion and that of most professionals. You want to go out there and scream with others in a black T Shirt? More power to you. This is America after all.







QUOTE
My suggestion is to really stay away from the 'no planes' theory, or theories.


Clearly you havent listened to the interview or even read the top of our home page.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org

Please tell me and the rest of us what the underlined sentence says... millions of others have read it. You should take a look.

I think i made my point clear...

As for the rest of your post, its clear you havent even viewed our work. Start with "Flight Of American 77".

Posted by: Trapster Aug 22 2009, 12:44 AM

QUOTE
We do not offer theory or point blame at this point in time.


And:
QUOTE
is an organization of aviation professionals and pilots throughout


And:
QUOTE
We do not accept the 9/11 Commission Report and/or "hypothesis" as a satisfactory explanation for the sacrifice every American has made and continues to make -- some more than others.


So, first off, I am not a member of Pilots because I am neither a pilot or aviation professional. I do not, and will never say that I speak for this outstanding group. I am a forum member and nothing else. I'm sorry you won't be with us at Ground Zero, but I understand your position.

However, there is a time to look at the big picture and the big issues and get out there and take part in a visible agitation. It is important to deny the LIE of 9/11 from those that would use it for evil.

Ok, I can still engage in asking questions and adding my worthless 2 cents worth, yes?

Lear worked under contract for the CIA. He had to have clearance, high level clearance. There is a connection between the CIA and Lear. You and he are both up front with that.

So, what is disinformation?

By one account:
QUOTE
misinformation that is deliberately disseminated in order to influence or confuse rivals


The game is an old one, to plant bogus and easily disproved claims in any inquiry into what the government is doing, in order to ridicule those asking questions. In the old days it worked, because the media was under government control and could be counted on to withhold exposure of the fraud until it could most damage those who asked questions. These days, in the age of the Internet, such planted hoaxes do not survive because the questions the media should ask but refuse to do so ARE asked and answered.



In the interview, Lear was kept in a tight box, the interviewer did most of the talking and only alluded to some 'far out' theories. The question format was simple, a direct question about aircraft speed and as to if this proves or disproves the 'no plane' theory. Simple and tight. Prefect for a straight yes/no answer.

Here, in this forum, I am urging caution when dealing with someone who has CIA ties and some far out theories (I guess Lear does support the hologram theory).

It's a classic case of getting people within an orgnization looking for the Truth to start in-fighting.

Lear presents as a good guy. If you trust him, cool.

There is a guy in NYC, Nico Haupt, that loves the hologram theory. Nico is a full wingnut and presents as a Govt. plant. Perhaps Lear and Haupt should get together and discuss the hologram theory?? (sorry, I could not resist that one)

Posted by: dMole Aug 22 2009, 01:46 AM

QUOTE (Trapster @ Aug 21 2009, 10:44 PM) *
Lear worked under contract for the CIA. He had to have clearance, high level clearance. There is a connection between the CIA and Lear. You and he are both up front with that.

Trapster, in all honesty this is probably the WRONG month to bring up "disinfo" charges. There is already a full-on sh*t-storm that appears to have been started by several other prominent "truth movement leaders" some time ago- I have even posted a one-page timeline over in the Debate forum for everyone's reference (and those dates were just the quick-n-dirty ones that I found in a quick INTERNET SEARCH and may need to be revised and other dates added). [HINT: Call it a "working copy." wink.gif ]

That said, have you ever actually worked for a government contractor? I have worked for more than one, and I actually had security clearances but sadly?? blink.gif they weren't all that "high..." rolleyes.gif In fact, our admin. assistants/secretaries often/usually had a higher clearance than I did as a scientist/engineer (although they rarely understood a small fraction of the written material or diagrams, which kept them (the secretaries) so efficient <<< *** : HINT).

With still more said, some could claim that I have worked for "USAF, USN, NASA, Russian, and Japanese Government" (and possibly the E.U. as well). In actuality, I actually worked for a contractor that had contracted with various "government" agencies (a couple of whom were far "spookier" than CIA, FWIW). rolleyes.gif

EDIT: Hallibortion, Blackwater/Xe, CACI, etc.- pretty much the same pattern (but likely far more sinister than the research/development end) I would expect.

EDIT2: Actually Trapster, a more RELEVANT question (IMHO) would involve Mr. John Lear and his involvement (or not) with the A-12/Y(F)-12/"SR-71" program. I'm ALL EARS for some of that...

I'll leave y'alls to do y'alls own research on "the numbers" (if you haven't already)...

Posted by: Lasthorseman Aug 22 2009, 06:16 AM

"The lie is different at every level"
Richard Hoagland

Thus the "disinformation" label may in truth apply. The collective evidence of an entire century of manipulation and control however is becoming more evident.

Posted by: rob balsamo Aug 22 2009, 07:39 AM

QUOTE (Trapster @ Aug 22 2009, 12:44 AM) *
It's a classic case of getting people within an orgnization looking for the Truth to start in-fighting.


The only people fighting over Lear are people from outside our organization, attempting to incite "infighting" within our organization.

There is not one aviation professional on our roster who has a problem with Lear being in our organization. Lear is a highly respected member of the Aviation Community. After all, he does hold several world records in aviation and his name does appear on thousands of pilot certificates throughout the world. I would even go so far to say others felt more comfortable offering their name and credentials to be listed on our roster because Lear is a member, but I cant be sure.

Also, the "interviewer", was me. You'd know that if you listened to the interview and not just "heard" it, or even just looked at the screen while the interview was playing. The interview was designed to be a short interview, to the point, with questions most frequently asked, and addressing accusations against Lear. As you can see, we dont spend much time on frivolous accusations, speculation, theory... etc.. and instead focus mainly on our work.

Trap, you have provided no evidence of Lear being a CIA asset except innuendo, your personal belief, and paranoia. It has been spelled out clearly Lears' "ties" to the CIA. He doesnt have any except being hired for an airline which was contracted by the CIA. This has been made clear to you time and time again, yet you still fail to grasp such a concept.

If you reply to this thread again, please bring documents and sources for your claims. Your frivolous accusations have gone on long enough with regard to a respected member of our organization.

As for "urging caution" when dealing with Lear on this forum. Lear has all of 2 posts here to date. http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index.php?showuser=744

Your caution is frivolous and unwarranted.

Posted by: johnlear Aug 22 2009, 12:53 PM

QUOTE (Trapster @ Aug 19 2009, 12:40 AM) *
Be very weary of Lear.


My wife has been weary of me for 38 years. But I am sure you mean wary. smile.gif

QUOTE
He is a dis-info specialist.


Not true. However if you could be more specific I will answer.

QUOTE
He does work for the CIA.


Not true. Between 1967 and 1982 I flew for companies that were contracted by the CIA.

QUOTE
He has off the wall theories about UFO's (dis-info put out by the CIA to hide the real truth about UFO's, that they are man-made).


Some are man made some are not. My father's company was a major DOD contractor in 1952 to work on anti-gravity,

QUOTE
Anything you say to him, anything that you give him goes straight to the CIA. Not that they don't already know who we are.


Not true. Over the past few years I have only talked to one current employee who was west coast interviewer for hiring. He has written several books about the war in SEA. He was working on the ground in Laos at the same time I was working air ops. He has written several books: Codename Mule and Last Man Out.

QUOTE
Watch it with Lear. It's called 'Poisoning the well'; that is, inserting bad info into a body of good info as to 'poison' the entire body of info. Aka, a little poison kills the entire well.


I would like to respond to this allegation but you will have to be more specific.

QUOTE
Once CIA, always CIA


True but I was not actually CIA. I was just a contract pilot.

Posted by: painter Aug 22 2009, 01:08 PM

I want to underscore what Rob is saying here, Trapster. As I understand it, and Rob will correct me if I'm wrong or clarify as needed, to be a core member of Pilots for 9/11 Truth a person has to be a verified aviation professional and has to be willing to publicly endorse the research and findings of P4T.

That said, to my knowledge there is NO stipulation that a qualified aviation professional who endorses and stands behind P4T's work has to either have or not have any particular belief. I'm sure that Rob doesn't ask these people whether or not they believe in UFO's, Big Foot -- or Jesus Christ for that matter. From the point of view of their professional qualifications and endorsement of our work, it is irrelevant and, in fact, would be prejudicial to even ask.

As is pointed out in this video, John Lear is qualified to be a core member of this organization. Whether or not he has some "far out there" ideas or beliefs is irrelevant. Lear's endorsement of Pilots for Truth does not translate into the opposite, Pilots for Truth's endorsement of his personal views -- or the personal views of any other core member.

As I stated earlier, I understand there are some detractors among the Truth movement who want to single out John Lear and use his endorsement of Pilots for Truth to discredit this organization because of his personal beliefs. But I ask you, do you really think this organization should be in the business of screening applicants for core membership based on their beliefs, their politics, their religion, their nationality, their personal philosophy -- whatever it might be? We don't know how many of our core members "believe" in UFO's (or what have you) and I'm willing to bet that Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice and Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, etc., don't either. Should we exclude David Ray Griffin because he is a Christian theologian? Should we exclude Steven Jones because he is a Mormon? (Note: I don't know what Steven Jones' personal religious beliefs are, only that he was a professor at BYU.) This whole line of thinking -- that we ought to exclude certain people from professional endorsement of Truth research because of their personal beliefs -- is so fundamentally wrong, repugnant and prejudicial, it should be an embarrassment to those who hold and espouse it.

Moving on to the question of CIA involvement. In the interview above John Lear has made clear that he was not an employee of the CIA but was, rather, an employee of airlines that were either contracted by the CIA or front organizations for the CIA. Now one could make something of this, I suppose, but as with the above, where do we draw the line? Should we say anyone who has ever worked for the CIA should not be allowed to participate in Truth movement? I'm thinking of people like CIA analyst Ray McGovern, for example. What about FBI employee Sibel Edmonds? Should we exclude people who have ever worked for a government agency or worked under contract for an organization doing work or research for a government agency? If so, there goes Steven Jones again.

I understand that you may personally feel very strongly about the subject of John Lear, that you may fear this "well poisoning" scenario -- but I ask you, who is bringing this up? Where is all this "concern" coming from? Who is trying to "divide" the Truth movement? Clearly it is not coming from corporate owned media. It is coming from a small group of individuals who want to discredit Pilots for Truth by association. They've singled out Lear and are making his personal beliefs and past associations with government agencies an issue under the GUISE of protecting the Truth movement.

The point I'm really making here, Trapster, is however well meaning your intentions may be, you are being used. We don't know the personal beliefs, political affiliation, government connections (if any) of people like Michael Wolsey, Jim Hoffman, Victoria Ashley and especially people like Arabesque and reprehensor who choose to remain anonymous. I don't really know the motivations behind their intentions in denigrating the work of Pilots for Truth and Citizen Investigation Team. I know what they say, that we are agents of disinformation and I also know they back this up with criticisms that are often speculative, factually inaccurate at best, and out and out lies at worst. Over and over again, for example, I hear them making the "100+" south-side eye-witness claim, even though this claim has been royally disproved. I have YET to see them acknowledge that this claim has been disproved. No retractions. No corrections of previously published work. I hear them lobby all kinds of accusations and slanders absent verifiable evidence. I hear them criticize the work of P4T and CIT from a "superior" attitude, rather than a "supportive" attitude of "we're here to offer our help with time, qualifications, money, whatever is needed to get at the truth." What I see them doing is creating a divide within the movement and then having the GAUL to say that it is WE who are creating this divide. I see people like you taking up this cause and espousing indefensible and repugnant positions that we ought to "filter" organizations, excluding certain individuals because of their personal beliefs and opinions and because of their past associations. AND I see them doing this in a manor that is prejudicial and inconsistent. If Pilots for Truth is going to have to disavow John Lear then I insist that the Truth movement disavow Ray McGovern. You know what they say, once a spook, always a spook. And I'm going to have to insist that EVERY MEMBER OF THE MOVEMENT state publicly once and for all what they do and do not believe in regarding "god" "UFO's" "Big Foot" and every other thing human beings believe in or have opinions about. And then I'm gong to INSIST that anyone who does NOT believe exactly as I do be EXCLUDED from membership in any professional 9/11 Truth organization. After all, what is fair is fair, right?

Of course I'm not being serious -- I'm just pointing up the absurdity of this argument. You should really be ashamed to be here attempting to make a case for it.

Posted by: johnlear Aug 22 2009, 01:11 PM

QUOTE (dMole @ Aug 20 2009, 03:46 AM) *
EDIT2: Actually Trapster, a more RELEVANT question (IMHO) would involve Mr. John Lear and his involvement (or not) with the A-12/Y(F)-12/"SR-71" program. I'm ALL EARS for some of that...


I was not involved in any way with the black bird except and all consuming interest. I knew several of the Lockheed test pilots. One was Darryl Greenamyer who checked me out in the F-104. Another was Bill Weaver who I flew copilot for delivering an L-1011 from Marana to Cambridge, England for Orbital Sciences. I would have been permanent copilot for the Pegasus Program but the Pentagon refused to issue a security clearance. If I remember correctly the exact statement to Lockheed was, "Under no circumstances will John Lear ever be issued any more clearances." I think the Pentagon was over reacting. smile.gif

Posted by: painter Aug 22 2009, 01:19 PM

QUOTE (johnlear @ Aug 22 2009, 09:53 AM) *
My wife has been weary of me for 38 years. But I am sure you mean wary. smile.gif
<snip>

Thanks for taking the time to address this issue, Mr. Lear.

Posted by: rob balsamo Aug 24 2009, 01:26 PM

NPT posts split and moved here..
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index.php?showtopic=17864

Posted by: tezzajw Aug 28 2009, 06:38 PM

No matter how hard you try to set the record straight, there's always going to be some jerks who will say anything to drag your names through the mud.

At least you both know that you're on to something when the jerks keep on making noise to discredit you.

Posted by: rob balsamo Aug 28 2009, 06:50 PM

Welcome back tezz!

I was starting to wonder where you been... smile.gif

Good to see ya...

Posted by: Trapster Aug 28 2009, 10:55 PM

Ok, I have stayed away from this because I thought things needed to cool down a bit.

I am sorry if I have caused confusion or made unwarrented accusations. I see that I have even cause Mr. Lear to address these issues here on this forum. Greetings Mr Lear, you are a man of many accomplishments.

Ok, I understand that I am going after a Sacred Cow here. And that I don't know a thing about all the good work that Mr Lear may be doing behind the scenes.

However, (here I go)

QUOTE
Trap, you have provided no evidence of Lear being a CIA asset except innuendo, your personal belief, and paranoia. It has been spelled out clearly Lears' "ties" to the CIA. He doesnt have any except being hired for an airline which was contracted by the CIA. This has been made clear to you time and time again, yet you still fail to grasp such a concept.


Yes, I talked about the 'interviewer' in the third person because I did not want to get into something directly where personalities and feelings could be hurt. I knew who was giving the interview.

Yep, all I have is evidence of acknowleged CIA 'ties' and paranoia. But, is it really that unfounded??

Let me walk that cat backward: If a government operative wanted to discredit a potent element of the Truth Movement, what might he do?

Send into that group a well respected and well credentialed individual with name recognition? A person who might have some of his own 'unfounded theories' outside the movement that might be used to discredit the entire group? And of course, when a member is interviewed in the press, the first thing the member is called on to defend is this tangential 'theory'?

Point of evidence:
Honestly, do ya really think that there is an underground 'Sub Canal' dug from the Pacific to a lake in Nevada where an Undersea Warfare base for subs is located? Just ponder it, I don't want a full blown argument.
http://www.thelivingmoon.com/47john_lear/02files/Navy_Secrets.html#Nevada

The 'evidence' presented here is pretty thin: A sign about Undersea Warfare and a very secretive guard.

Well, I think think of a very logical reason why the US Navy would want to locate a test and research center in a lake in Nevada---Security from prying eyes. Torpedoes, Sonar, SEAL tactics, propulsion systems (propellers), and more could be observed from Soviet Subs if tested in any Ocean. Nevada is the site of other 'secret' military bases, so the location of a Navy testing center is not that far fetched. But, I'd call saying that there is a deep underground canal linking the lake with the ocean a real trip in creative thinking. (With all due respect Mr. Lear)

And, you know how the press loves to go at people who talk about UFO's and Alien Civilizations. Just ask Presidential candidate Kucinich about how they tore into him.

(Personally, I hope that some of what Lear says about that subject is true, it'd be fun to talk to an alien one day, ask him how his civilization coped with the challenges we face here on Earth)

My last words on the subject (truly)
The Pilot's for 9/11 Truth is a powerful organization. It is guaranteed to attract both positive and negative attention once some of its big research projects are completed. Projects involving solid mathematical analysis, data computation and principals of science. But, you can be sure that the first 'press' questions will be directed toward the subject of 'crazy UFO conspiracy theories'.

To Mr Lear, I did not mean to insult you or your contributions. I see from your response that you have a great sense of humor and took it lightly. You have presented a truly astonishing body of 'theory' on other sites. Perhaps there is much more to mankind that I know. Perhaps I am paranoid in a negative way. Given the gravity (slight pun) of the magnitude of the events of 9/11, I simply caution any professional group to be weary of any 'appearance' of 'crazy theories'. As we know, perception is reality.

Cheers John Lear, thanks for taking time here. Cheers Pilots for 9/11 Truth, keep up the good work.

Posted by: rob balsamo Aug 28 2009, 11:07 PM

Trap,

I havent read your full reply.

With that said, do you feel i should boot Lear out of our organization? And if so, how much aeronautical experience do you have to justify such a judgment?

Further, why is it that no one core member of our organization have a problem with Lear? Matter of fact, every one of them hold high respect for the man. I know this personally as i have spoken to each one personally.

Again, Lear has told me if he becomes a liability to our organization, to boot his ass out. Why do you think i havent?

Posted by: tezzajw Aug 29 2009, 01:10 AM

QUOTE (Trapster @ Aug 29 2009, 12:55 PM) *
A person who might have some of his own 'unfounded theories' outside the movement that might be used to discredit the entire group?

I don't understand your take on this, trapster.

John Lear does not represent the entire 'Truth Movement'.

As far as I know, John Lear represents John Lear and he does it quite well.

You can speculate all that you like but you're going against what has been directly denied in the interview.

Posted by: painter Aug 29 2009, 02:49 AM

QUOTE (Trapster @ Aug 28 2009, 07:55 PM) *
(Personally, I hope that some of what Lear says about that subject is true, it'd be fun to talk to an alien one day, ask him how his civilization coped with the challenges we face here on Earth)

Well, as a visitor to this god forsaken planet myself, I can tell you the alien would laugh at your question because it seems to assume that all or most other 'civilizations' evolved through the same set of challenges that human beings have created for themselves. That is hardly the case, I can assure you. One of the reasons so many of us are here watching is because, like Shakespeare's 'little green man', Puck, we simply find it difficult to believe what fools these mortals be. It's damn hilarious! Most intelligent galactic species are not so S T U P I D to ever get anywhere near the kind of impasse humanity has created for itself. Human beings are truly some of the most gullible beings with pretensions to intelligence and consciousness that anyone in the galaxy has ever seen. To many of us, the whole human predicament is a sort of bizarre, sad joke. You really have no idea what you're capable of at your best. At your worst, you are some of the most foul creatures to ever climb out of the slime. Unbelievably crude. And you guys have all these "lizzy" phobias where, for me, I look at you primates and go -- EYYUCK! The stench alone is unbearable!

QUOTE
<snip>I simply caution any professional group to be weary of any 'appearance' of 'crazy theories'. As we know, perception is reality.
.
Is it now. See that is the kind of thing a human being who thinks he's smart would say. No, no, no, no. "Perception" is NOT "reality". Don't get me wrong, I understand fully what you're saying. But what you're saying confuses the issue rather than clarifying it. "Perception" is what I call "the self/world matrix". Reality is something completely different: Knowable but inconceivable and largely beyond the range of the senses allowed within the frame of our self/world matrix. (In other words, by human standards, 'non ordinary' sensibilities.)

SOoooo... you don't want 9/11 Truth to be made fun of by some suited ignoramuses whose sole raison d'être is to perpetuate mass hypnosis, eh? Wouldn't it make a whole lot more sense for all of us who know better to just get to the point where we laugh these corporate ass clowns off the stage?? They blather on and on and on and on about everything but the most important things we need to know. Why is anyone even paying attention to them, that's what I want to know. I mean, we all know their real job is to keep us consuming bull sh*t -- and I, for one, stopped buying it long ago. And, you know what, I'm not the only one. True, I may be a rare fish in a sea of bleating sheep but I'd be willing to bet there are more people who believe in UFOs right now (whatever their truth may be) than believe 9/11 was an inside job. There are hundreds of billions of people all over this planet that believe all kinds of crazy sh*t I think is utterly insane. Whether or not they believe the truth of 9/11 depends upon them, not me, not John Lear, and not some toothily groomed manikin with a wig and an American flag lapel pin surrounded by brand-named super graphics.

Posted by: tnemelckram Aug 29 2009, 09:09 PM

Hi Trapster and Painter!

QUOTE
(Personally, I hope that some of what Lear says about that subject is true, it'd be fun to talk to an alien one day, ask him how his civilization coped with the challenges we face here on Earth)


QUOTE
Well, as a visitor to this god forsaken planet myself, I can tell you the alien would laugh at your question because it seems to assume that all or most other 'civilizations' evolved through the same set of challenges that human beings have created for themselves.Most intelligent galactic species are not so S T U P I D to ever get anywhere near the kind of impasse humanity has created for itself. Human beings are truly some of the most gullible beings with pretensions to intelligence and consciousness that anyone in the galaxy has ever seen.


Well I'm not sure I agree with either of you two guys or John Lear either. It's not a big leap to believe that there are many other intelligent civilizations about the universe. But it a huge leap to believe that they must be more advanced than us, or that we would be able to recognize each other as life (anthropic principle), or as intelligent, or that we would be able to engage in meaningful communication with them, or that they would share our values. They might even regard coping with challenges as a bad thing!

QUOTE
and not some toothily groomed manikin with a wig and an American flag lapel pin surrounded by brand-named super graphics.


Now you wouldn't be talking about John Edwards or Mitt Romney or Mick Jagger here, would you Painter?

Posted by: Quest Aug 30 2009, 01:39 AM

Do you guys mind if I weigh in on this?

I am not going to tackle the credibility issue because any supposed "tie" with the CIA but rather I'm going to hit it from another angle.

I have not yet read John Lear's complete take on UFO's but what I gather from his "some are real (ufos) and some aren't real (man-made)" statement, he does in fact believe that other-worldly beings have visisted our planet and may in fact still be doing so. My issue with that is that like Trapster, I have seen the UFO topic, along with "grassy-knollers" phrase brought up by the 911 perp's media again and again in attempts to try and discredit a truthseeker or the movement as a whole. Case in point, recently and ironically, I was actually guilty of passing on a video in the Pilot's "Lobby" forum which contained UFO material. In hindsight, the guy in this video is clearly a fraud.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index.php?showtopic=17861

I'll bet I was guilty as many others that got sucked in by the guy in the above video who told us everything we wanted to know with the "Ted Kennedy wanted my 14 year old daughter" along with Kissinger's infamous "useless eater" phrase. Yep. Outrageous stuff indeed and it needed to shared immediately. He told us what we wanted to hear and we/I passed on his video.... blindly. Big mistake. It was later brought to my intention that the guy's website has all kinds of wierd alternative religion and UFO stuff inked to his site and as anyone knows in the "911 truth business", you don't lead with your weakest stuff when spreading the news. But yet, that is what this guy in this video has done. All that was missing was the "911 perps are shape-shifting lizards" stuff. Now for those here who don't know me well, I, like John Lear, believe there is a lot of evidence to indicate NPT is what transpired at the towers and no, I don't believe holograms were used because it wasn't necessary. Explosions took place in the tower basements causing bystanders to look DOWN at ground level just seconds PRIOR to the supposed impacts in a wonderful slight-of-hand. What an opportune time to create the plane impact gashes with thermite and pre-planted explosives while simultaneously showing fake videos on television. The official "plane impacts" story will now be readily accepted by most people.

I also disagree with Lear's hologram theory. Holograms are an unecessary tool in my scenario and in fact they would only alert bystanders to something fishy if they saw a 'plane' but heard no engine roar. In fact, while typing this, I just produced a mutually exclusive, either/or situation with the "hologram theory" vs. the "impact video theory", that is, they both cannot be "true". The impact videos show loud engine roars, yet we have a hologram theory too. One of these items are false - or - they are BOTH false. My bet is on the latter, as in the old "Coke vs. Pepsi" routine where in reality the same people probably own BOTH companies and carry on the facade to steer business away from the competition. Same for "Democrats" vs "Republicans". But I digress.

My problem with UFO's is that the only people to have "captured" one is the MILITARY. Got that? For all of the supposed sightings around the world the only crash occurred next to a MILITARY base. Just lucky I guess. And no, I don't consider the 1947 Roswell a "civilian" capture for many reasons not the least of which it was that in occurred in the back yard of an AIR FORCE BASE. And we also know that Prescott Bush and his Wall Street NWO banking buddies helped build Hitler's military machine. And what did Hitler's military try and build in secret locations? "Flying saucers". Yet, this was BEFORE the 1947 Roswell crash! How could Hitler and the Nazi SS have possibly known what was to occur in Roswell 2 or 3 years later, AFTER the war ended? Unless, of course, Hitler was following the NWO's marching orders, a premise that seems bolstered by the Bush/Wall Street/Hitler connection. Then we have the fact that, the CFR worked with Princeton and CBS to air the 1938 "War Of The Worlds" radio brodcast in which the entire populatiuon was hoaxed into believing we were being INVADED BY MARTIANS. This was 9 YEARS before Roswell. Are we seeing a pattern here yet? If not, I will spell it out for you. This is known as PREDICTIVE PROGRAMMING. This is what is EXACTLY what is happeneing with the "terrorist alerts" and "flu warnings". The Pentagon has worked with the media and Hollywood for decades to facilitate the scaremongering. In fact, the NWO MILITARY has been hoaxing us into believeing there are otherwordly monsters out in the wild blue yonder for over 50 YEARS.

On the technical aspect of aliens and UFOs, the supposed beings and craft would be subject to the same Van Allen radiation belt danger that the Apollo mission hoaxters would have experienced had they actually gone to the moon. Do we even need to mention that there are all kinds of radiation producing bodies in the universe that space travelers would have to avoid? Then there is the question of how long it would take for an alien craft to get here. If it were traveling at such a high rate of speed, faster than the speed of light as suggested by some, for millions if not BILLIIONS of miles, how does it dodge a softball-sized piece of space flotsam that would otherwise "rip a new one" in the side of the ship thus aborting the mission? And what about the G-Forces these "aliens" would have to contend with when passing heavenly bodies at light speed or whatever speed necessary to traverse BILLIONS OF MILES and yet do so during their lifetime so that they won't die of old age before their destination is reached? I could go on and on and on.... What I am getting at is that more than likely, not only is the universe much bigger than we could possibly imagine, it is likely so vast that it neither ever "began" and nor will it ever likely "end". It may morph, distort, expand and realign but it will NEVER dissapear, because, what is infinite just "is". And the likelyhood that an such an advanced civilization exists at EXACTLY the the same time, over the course of BILLIONS OF YEARS, no, make that INFINITY, has found us when we have not yet wiped each other off the face of the planet, is IMHO, a big fat ZERO. In effect, for all practical and relative purposes, we are ALONE. Yes, other civilizations may have existed somewhere in the universe, and probably some will exist some time in the future, but the likelyhood that if such a civilization exists presently, with the necessary technology, close enough, and has found us during our short blip on the radar, is virtually nil.

So, what's my point in all this and what does this have to do with John Lear?

My point is this; that given the age and size of the universe and the time we have existed on this planet, we earthlings are but a flea on a whale's a*s and the probability that in the short span of time that man has existed on this godforsaken planet he has been vistited upon by beings with technology that is capable of traveling at the speeds necessary to cross the universe and actually survive the trip without hitting anything while flying at light-speed, without burning up from heat or radiation and without dying of old age in the process (unless of couse they also perfected Hollywood movie-style "cryogenics") you can virtually rest assurred that any supposed UFOs that exist are indeed man-made; especially when considering the aformentioned MILITARY/CFR hoaxes. Oh, and did I mention the fake Apollo missions?

IMO, the UFO stuff is the "external force" that Henry Kissinger and Ronald Reagan referred to when they were talking about reasons for "people of the world to unite". Defending ourselves from UFOs is also a way to drain endless amounts of HUGE money from taxpayers because with UFOs, like Al CIAda, it is difficult to disprove what doesn't exist. Only your military knows for sure. Trust them. B)

Where does this leave John Lear? I don't know why Mr. Lear says what he does regarding "UFOs", but I CAN say with great conviction that any UFOs that exist are almost certainly made here on terra-firma.

Posted by: aerohead Aug 30 2009, 02:40 AM

All i know is, we have a hard enough time getting people
to understand the hidden mechanism that carried out 9/11
without bringing mind blowing UFO, Alien and fake moon
landings into the mix, that will surely send alot of people
laughingly on their way to tell their friends about how
P4T is full of a bunch of tin foil hat nut cases. Most people
dont understand science and history the way we do.

Im not saying that i dont believe in other life and all that,
and im not trying to disrespect anyone. Im saying that some
people will, and probably already have, come here and read
this stuff and are lost from joining our ranks.

There's a time and place for everything.
I think we need to keep in mind that the world
is reading us.......... and, imo, we may need to refrain
from topics that the main audience will not understand.
I'd love to talk UFOs and the like in a private part of the
forum or on another site, but not here in the open while we
are at a crucial time in getting info out about 9/11.


A 9/11 investigation is what we need to get done.
And fast.

Later brothers
-Aero

Posted by: Quest Aug 30 2009, 02:50 AM

QUOTE (aerohead @ Aug 30 2009, 07:40 AM) *
All i know is, we have a hard enough time getting people
to understand the hidden mechanism that carried out 9/11
without bringing mind blowing UFO, Alien and fake moon
landings into the mix, that will surely send alot of people
laughingly on their way to tell their friends about how
P4T is full of a bunch of tin foil hat nut cases. Most people
dont understand science and history the way we do.


Well said and so true.

Posted by: tnemelckram Aug 30 2009, 04:53 AM

Hi Quest!

QUOTE
The likelihood that in the short span of time that man has existed on this forsaken planet that mankind has been visited by beings with technology that is capable of traveling at the speeds necessary to cross the universe and actually survive the trip without hitting anything or burning up and without dying of old age in the process


That follows my lines of thinking.

QUOTE
you can virtually rest assured that any supposed UFOs that exist are indeed man-made;


There have been a lot of incidents that are hard to explain, but that is the simplest global explanation. The famous report by the pilot of the single engine plane over the Cascade Mountains in 1947 is commonly regarded as the beginning mass curiosity about UFOs. It coincides with: (1) intense post war efforts combining US, British and German minds and war experience to develop jet and other aircraft; (2) technological competition with Communist countries; (3) the National Security Act; (4) Yeager breaking the sound barrier; and (5) postwar resumption of the 1930's explosion in science fiction oriented entertainment. There was great public optimism about aeronautic matters at the time while the pace of the publicly announced advancements alone was very quick. UFO reports prior to 1947 are extremely rare and lack detail, while after 1947 the reports become frequent and start to include details about the appearance and behavior of the craft. Since then, all reporters have been able to relate UFOs to human experience. They have used words like round, square, color, lights, windows, hatches, metallic to describe how they look, but never use beam, ray, or vapor that are at odds with the fact that all of our aircraft are solid. Fly, hover, shift, dart and sudden change of direction have described what they do, once again aircraft do all these things. Reports of size, speed, direction, maneuvers and time stay within the theoretical limits of some existing human technology (not necessarily aircraft) or natural phenomena. This all suggests that in 1947 people began reporting things they expected to see and/or actually began seeing and reporting advanced human craft.

QUOTE
Oh, and did I mention the fake Apollo missions?


A little too far. Plus developing this technology would be an even easier step if the UFO's were actually advanced human aircraft.

QUOTE
Where does this leave John Lear?


Regardless of what he believes, I have no reason to doubt what he said about whether he has anything to do with the CIA. Even in the extreme case that he is a current CIA agent, what matters is whether he has a mission is to disrupt PFT. He rarely Posts and keeps a low profile, which is hardly what you would expect a disinfo agent to do because the only way you can spread disinfo is to, well, spread it.

Posted by: lunk Aug 30 2009, 07:59 AM

Imagination is the most powerful force in the universe.
All new things, have to be imagined first,
before they can be engineered, designed and build.

Did the Earth rise to the apple,
or does the apple fall off the tree?
My imagination kicks in and tells me, the latter.

Physics says, they are the same,
it doesn't matter if the apple hits the ground,
or the ground hits the apple. the impact is the same.
...something tells me that there is a problem with physics.
but that could just be my imagination.

It's easy to imagine...
It's hard to imagine...

I watched a Youtube video about farm land in the Hale Crater on Mars.
I spent a day pondering on extra-terrestrial agricultural practices,
within the protective walls of a martian crater, in a warm pocket of high pressure low altitude martian air...probably lots of well water, tanks, above ground, to hold the water, of course... You could see it all, in a picture from the European Space people, taken from an orbiting satellite.

I looked at the pictures, from the ESA and found a few, from different perspectives, as the satellite flew over, I figured. All of the pictures, showed the same farm land and water (or fuel) tanks.
I thought it had to be true.

Then I realized, that all the satellite had done, was take an altitude reading of the crater and from that data, a computer generated 3D picture was made, inside a computer, and was topographically colour-coded to easily show the surface altitude, and re-drawn, by a computer, to show the terrain from several different angles. None of these were actually real pictures.
The farm land and water/fuel tanks were left over artifacts in the computer 3D programming, that put the pictures together, from the data points.

There was no farmland in the Hale Crater on Mars.

Imagination; the cause, and the solution, to all our problems.

I see nothing wrong with looking into far out ideas,
but there, sometimes, is a less radical explanation,
that explains the observation, better.

UFO's became prominent, soon after the nuclear age had begun.
Could this whole thing, be just a cover-up for the experimentation,
of highly radioactive nuclear flying device experiments.

The perceived threat of aliens,
could be used to hold sway over the people.
Will you defend the aliens, or fight against them?
...and we have been divided again.

sorry for the rant

...imagine...

Posted by: DoYouEverWonder Aug 30 2009, 09:53 AM

QUOTE (lunk @ Aug 30 2009, 07:59 AM) *
I see nothing wrong with looking into far out ideas,
but there, sometimes, is a less radical explanation,
that explains the observation, better.

UFO's became prominent, soon after the nuclear age had begun.
Could this whole thing, be just a cover-up for the experimentation,
of highly radioactive nuclear flying device experiments.

The perceived threat of aliens,
could be used to hold sway over the people.
Will you defend the aliens, or fight against them?
...and we have been divided again.

sorry for the rant

...imagine...


Now I understand the motivation for folks like Lear and Aldrin who are putting some of this very far out there stuff out. Getting to fly some of these experimental crafts must be quite a thrill.

----

However, good research can stand on it's own no matter who does or doesn't endorse it. I don't buy the myth that associating with 'questionable' people will discredit the work that good 9/11 researchers have done.

Edit: to add comment

Posted by: Quest Aug 30 2009, 02:05 PM

QUOTE (DoYouEverWonder @ Aug 30 2009, 01:53 PM) *
However, good research can stand on it's own no matter who does or doesn't endorse it. I don't buy the myth that associating with 'questionable' people will discredit the work that good 9/11 researchers have done.

Edit: to add comment


I agree with you, Doyoueverwonder. It doesn't and shouldn't discredit people to speculate or theorize. Police investigators theorize constantly and theories on a given crime may range from mild to wild and are not eliminated because something "sounds crazy" but rather logic and data eliminates them.

We should give people more credit and in a polite and open atmoshpere people will not fear being shouted down or ostracized.

Posted by: Quest Aug 30 2009, 02:05 PM

QUOTE (lunk @ Aug 30 2009, 11:59 AM) *
Imagination is the most powerful force in the universe.
All new things, have to be imagined first,
before they can be engineered, designed and build.

Did the Earth rise to the apple,
or does the apple fall off the tree?
My imagination kicks in and tells me, the latter.

Physics says, they are the same,
it doesn't matter if the apple hits the ground,
or the ground hits the apple. the impact is the same.
...something tells me that there is a problem with physics.
but that could just be my imagination.

It's easy to imagine...
It's hard to imagine...

I watched a Youtube video about farm land in the Hale Crater on Mars.
I spent a day pondering on extra-terrestrial agricultural practices,
within the protective walls of a martian crater, in a warm pocket of high pressure low altitude martian air...probably lots of well water, tanks, above ground, to hold the water, of course... You could see it all, in a picture from the European Space people, taken from an orbiting satellite.

I looked at the pictures, from the ESA and found a few, from different perspectives, as the satellite flew over, I figured. All of the pictures, showed the same farm land and water (or fuel) tanks.
I thought it had to be true.

Then I realized, that all the satellite had done, was take an altitude reading of the crater and from that data, a computer generated 3D picture was made, inside a computer, and was topographically colour-coded to easily show the surface altitude, and re-drawn, by a computer, to show the terrain from several different angles. None of these were actually real pictures.
The farm land and water/fuel tanks were left over artifacts in the computer 3D programming, that put the pictures together, from the data points.

There was no farmland in the Hale Crater on Mars.

Imagination; the cause, and the solution, to all our problems.

I see nothing wrong with looking into far out ideas,
but there, sometimes, is a less radical explanation,
that explains the observation, better.

UFO's became prominent, soon after the nuclear age had begun.
Could this whole thing, be just a cover-up for the experimentation,
of highly radioactive nuclear flying device experiments.

The perceived threat of aliens,
could be used to hold sway over the people.
Will you defend the aliens, or fight against them?
...and we have been divided again.

sorry for the rant

...imagine...


Excellent post, Lunk.

Posted by: painter Aug 30 2009, 03:08 PM

QUOTE (Quest @ Aug 30 2009, 11:05 AM) *
Excellent post, Lunk.

Except that he is wrong. Imagination is undoubtedly a powerful force but consciousness (as distinct from any object of it, be it imaginative or otherwise) is more fundamental.

Posted by: DoYouEverWonder Aug 30 2009, 03:21 PM

QUOTE (painter @ Aug 30 2009, 03:08 PM) *
Except that he is wrong. Imagination is undoubtedly a powerful force but consciousness (as distinct from any object of it, be it imaginative or otherwise) is more fundamental.


You can't have an imagination without consciousness, so in a sense imagination is a manifestation of consciousness. Is it the most powerful manifestation? If it's not, it's certainly a big one.

Posted by: Quest Aug 30 2009, 03:57 PM

QUOTE (painter @ Aug 30 2009, 08:08 PM) *
Except that he is wrong. Imagination is undoubtedly a powerful force but consciousness (as distinct from any object of it, be it imaginative or otherwise) is more fundamental.


My comment wasn't regarding imagination vs. consciousness, it was Lunk's take on the supposed farmland in the Hale Crater on Mars and it's relation to NWO hoaxes. To your point, I agree with you. However, I would say that imagination is a natural result of consciousness and they are equally important - I am not sure why we need to make a choice. More than likely, if a being is self aware or conscious, it is are going to have an imagination. However, it's anyone's argument as to how vivid of an imagination it is going to be and how capable this being is of inventing or implementing creations as a reslut of their imagination. Either way, Lunk's imagination stance doesn't take away from his point on the Mar's crater/farmland story.

Posted by: lunk Aug 30 2009, 04:14 PM

QUOTE (painter @ Aug 30 2009, 12:08 PM) *
Except that he is wrong.


LOL!
Nothing like a touch of artistic criticism,
to focus my attention on somthin'.

I think there are levels of consciousness.
Even a fly, is conscious of a flyswatter, sometimes.

Does a fly have consciousness?
In a way, yes,
but does a fly have imagination?

I think that within people there are different levels of consciousness.
...and imagination.

cheers, lunk

Posted by: Quest Aug 30 2009, 04:18 PM

QUOTE (lunk @ Aug 30 2009, 09:14 PM) *
LOL!
Nothing like a touch of artistic criticism,
to focus my attention on somthin'.

I think there are levels of consciousness.
Even a fly, is conscious of a flyswatter, sometimes.

Does a fly have consciousness?
In a way, yes,
but does a fly have imagination?

I think that within people there are different levels of consciousness.
...and imagination.

cheers, lunk


Exactly.

Posted by: dMole Aug 30 2009, 09:11 PM

[Sorry all for the "sour" mood, but...] J.H.F'n.C!! Could we ALL come back on "topic" re: John Lear and "disinformation" sometime soon?

Sorry again all, but I've been reading FAR TOO MANY "lost in the sand..." threads lately (MORE elsewhere than HERE FWIW.) smile.gif

Posted by: dMole Aug 30 2009, 09:44 PM

In truth...

those trying to lay down the "disinfo" traps might find the "artistic" crowd more "entertaining" than I... whistle.gif

Posted by: lunk Aug 31 2009, 01:53 AM

QUOTE (dMole @ Aug 30 2009, 06:44 PM) *
In truth...

those trying to lay down the "disinfo" traps might find the "artistic" crowd more "entertaining" than I... whistle.gif


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExfV50H-mak

Now that's entertainment!

Trying to get back on track...

It's an asset to "see more", wrong or right.
I see no divisions, in imagination.
but I can imagine how division can weaken a cause.

Is, so and so, a CIA asset?
probably not consciously,
and that couldn't be as bad as someone, in their pocket.

Is johnlear intentionally spreading information to distract
the public from facts about 9/11?

I haven't seen it here.

And I fully appreciate the work of johnlear for the "movement", and
I see his research into, er, extra-terrestrial, stuff, an indicator of someone looking into the box from outside the given angles.

Reality involves looking into the impossible
and finding an explanation.

BTW, I think that people in earlier ages figured out a way, to get to the moon, long before our civilization began, and perhaps other planets, as well.
...and maybe they are still there.

Posted by: Omega892R09 Aug 31 2009, 10:42 AM

QUOTE (lunk @ Aug 28 2009, 10:59 AM) *
Imagination is the most powerful force in the universe.
All new things, have to be imagined first,...

Or studied working in the natural world first.
Edit:
Which brings in that which Painter mentioned, 'consciousness'.

Posted by: Trapster Aug 31 2009, 12:26 PM

It's not my place to express any opinion about Core Members bring 'ejected' from P4T.

I expressed an overall opinion, and that's where I will leave it.

I don't possess an ounce of 'aeronautical' expertise in evaluating anyone or any theory. But I like to think that I can conduct a little 'critical thinking' on the subject.

Cheers

Posted by: painter Aug 31 2009, 02:32 PM

QUOTE (lunk @ Aug 30 2009, 10:53 PM) *
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExfV50H-mak


Yeah. Good rant. This is getting close to the heart of it, IMO. It has to do with us. If we can't change ourselves in some significant way, how can we expect to bring about equally significant external changes? WE (those of us living and those of us past) made the conditions for 9/11 (and all this BS) possible. WE have participated in our own subjugation for generations. We've also struggled against it for generations. And HERE is where we are NOW.

Step 1: What kind of world do we want? I mean personally, what do you want, what do I want?

I have to really think about this and delve into it and be willing to look at my own INNER CONTRADICTIONS about what I want. If I say I want a world of "peace" (for example) but don't see how I, through my ignorance and apathy and consumption of resources that rightly belong to someone else (for example), then I'm just fooling myself. If I say I want THE TRUTH but am not willing to look for it in myself as well as in the world around me, then what "truth" is it I really want except the further aggrandizement of my own ego? The truth f*cking hurts, dude! -- and yes, it can set you free.

Step 2: How do we get from here to there? I mean all of us and I men you and I.

Like the guy said, we need to know where we are, how we got here, and where we want to go. If I can see what kind of world I want and begin to see what keeps me from having it -- how I keep myself and everyone else locked up in deceptions about myself and the world -- maybe there is some way out of this mess. It ain't gona happen over night. Human beings have made great technological strides in the past century or so. NOW it is time to make great strides sociologically and within ourselves from a meta-psychological POV. The more conscious and aware we can become of ourselves and of our own inner contradictions, the MORE effective we're going to become in terms of addressing this absolute MESS we've made of the world (economically, politically, socially, environmentally and every other way). Yes, it is true, there are psychopaths who have played a HUGE role in getting us here -- that can not be ignored. But, at the same time, who let these nut-cases stake over in the first place? Who has allowed them to run this ship right into the ironshore? We may not be able to control what they do -- but we CAN control what we do -- and when it comes right down to it, all the 'power' they have depends upon someone else doing something for THEM.

Anyway . . . as far as I'm concerned, the whole John Lear thing is a NON issue. I get where people are coming from about it but I think they're concern is misplaced. Who is making this an issue? The media? Nope. I haven't seen it if they have. Do they disparage us? Oh, sure. Nothing new there. It is to be expected. Do we have to give a damn what they say? No, we don't. We take back our power. THEY no longer determine WHAT 'truth' I believe in. Neither does anyone else. It's up to me. I've revoked my tacit 'consent' to be 'governed' by these ass hats. I'm dedicated to seeing to it that their lies become more transparent to more people everyday. The genie is out of the bottle and he ain't going back in.

Posted by: dMole Aug 31 2009, 03:07 PM

QUOTE (lunk @ Aug 30 2009, 11:53 PM) *
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExfV50H-mak

Now that's entertainment!

Trying to get back on track...

It's an asset to "see more", wrong or right.
I see no divisions, in imagination.
but I can imagine how division can weaken a cause.

Thank you my "brother lunk," for that was an "aptly-timed" response to my "pseudo"-"frustrated" with all this pseudo-"disinfo" BULLSHIT! (I have been watching several "frontiers" [both personally and "politically"] for QUITE a WHILE now..

My "radar" ranges far (I'm afraid...)

Posted by: Quest Aug 31 2009, 08:23 PM

John Lear, do you mind if I ask you a few questions? The post linked below states in detail my opinion on the UFO aspect, in particular how the NWO began hoaxing the USA and the WORLD for that matter on the idea that UFOs exist and have been perpetrating this hoax for over 50 years and well BEFORE the 1947 Roswell crash in a strategy known as "Predictive Programming". I strongly believe the UFO phenomenon is a man-made, NWO creation in an attempt to "rally people of the world against the external threat". In other words, a hoax, just like 911, the Apollo missions, the USS LIberty, the Gulf Of Tonkin and on and on....

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index.php?s=&showtopic=17842&view=findpost&p=10775912

Also mentioned in my post is how the NWO looked for threats not only among the human population but extra-terrestrial as well as pretexts to usher in a one-world-government. As mentioned earlier, the hoaxing began BEFORE the 1947 Roswell 'crash' in a NWO operation some refer to as PREDICTIVE PROGRAMMING. Predictive programming is also what the NWO, it's media and Hollywood use to make plausibe "terrorist threats" and "flu plagues" or any other theoretically disastrous issue that can be used as tool to push a police state and one-world-government.

I wish to ask these questions to feel you out and understand why you believe the UFOs are "real" as opposed to man-made hoaxes. For purposes of being thorough I am going to ask some questions that for some may seem almost obvious or rhetorical; but I am not going to assume what you do and don't know on any aspect of the UFO issue. In the process maybe we can clear up as to what you are about. So, here goes...

1. Are you aware that Princeton University, CBS and the Council On Foriegn Relations (an NWO entity) were behind the 1938 radio broadcast of The "War Of The Worlds" in which the USA was hoaxed into believing we were being invaded by "martians"?
http://www.hourofthetime.com/warofthe.htm

2. Are you aware that Prescott Bush and his banking cronies helped build Hitler's war machine prior to WW2 and continued doing so AFTER the war began?
http://www.tarpley.net/bush2.htm

3. Are you aware that BEFORE the occurence of the 1947 Roswell "saucer crash" that Hitler's Nazi SS were already (supposedly) in the process of trying to build saucer-like craft?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHLXKXxV7YU&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8RNLbxbIeo
http://www.burlingtonnews.net/hitlersufo.html
http://www.burlingtonnews.net/ufonazi.html

4. Are you aware that after WW2 that the American military brought many Nazi scientists to the US to work for the Pentagon and intelligence in "Operation Paperclip"?

5. Are you aware that the USA was also, at least since 1950, trying to build saucer-like craft?
http://www.erichufschmid.net/TFC/FlyingSaucers/FlyingSaucers.html

6. Are you aware of Henry Kissinger's and Ronald Reagan's statements regarding the supposed UFO threat and a call for "people of the world to unite" against it?
http://www.timstouse.com/UFOs/ronaldreagan.htm
http://www.whale.to/b/kissinger_w.html

QUOTE
Today Americans would be outraged if U.N. troops entered Los Angeles to restore order; tomorrow they will be grateful. This is especially true if they were told there was an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence. It is then that all peoples of the world will plead with world leaders to deliver them from this evil. The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well being granted to them by their world government.
– Henry Kissinger

7. Do you find it at all curious that with all of the UFO sightings around the world for the better part of 5 decades, that the only crash that took place where a spacecraft was supposedly captured along with "aliens" was adjacent to an air force base(Roswell)?

8. Lastly, what proof do you have that any supposed alien spacecraft or beings have visited this planet besides second hand accounts as in the case of Bob Lazar? Do you have any 1st hand experiences regarding UFOs or aliens?

Thanks for your patience, John.

Posted by: painter Aug 31 2009, 09:51 PM

Quest, why don't you post these questions in the Alt Theories forum thread created specifically for this purpose?

Posted by: Quest Aug 31 2009, 10:18 PM

QUOTE (painter @ Sep 1 2009, 02:51 AM) *
Quest, why don't you post these questions in the Alt Theories forum thread created specifically for this purpose?


Sorry, Painter. Will do. That's what I thought this thread was for. Would you mind splitting this post from the thread and moving it there? I just don't want to break the links to articles/vidoes in this post and then have to search for the material again.

Thanks!

Posted by: JimMac Sep 1 2009, 08:58 PM

QUOTE (painter @ Aug 31 2009, 02:32 PM) *
Anyway . . . as far as I'm concerned, the whole John Lear thing is a NON issue. I get where people are coming from about it but I think they're concern is misplaced. Who is making this an issue? The media? Nope. I haven't seen it if they have. Do they disparage us? Oh, sure. Nothing new there. It is to be expected. Do we have to give a damn what they say? No, we don't. We take back our power. THEY no longer determine WHAT 'truth' I believe in. Neither does anyone else. It's up to me. I've revoked my tacit 'consent' to be 'governed' by these ass hats. I'm dedicated to seeing to it that their lies become more transparent to more people everyday. The genie is out of the bottle and he ain't going back in.


I am of the opinion that we who are ' in the know ' got here by a lot of work. I know I did, just sorting through all the bullshit. We are a small fringe element. Nothing with any mass behind it - yet - what I am hoping is that the truth still counts. All we can do is push it. I pushed it this last weekend again at a family and friends party. I found two farmers in the group who responded, cousins. One, a savvy 72 year old farmer from Sask, with his pilots license i might add, responded by saying, he just knew something wasn't right with the story, because those buildings mushroomed down, in his words. My point of view was an affirmation for him about something he'd already been thinking. Then he went on to tell me about how he'd lost trust with government long ago. I hope eventually he might dig around for himself. I planted the seed.

Posted by: aerohead Sep 1 2009, 09:35 PM

National Geographic had a special last night (mon. aug 31).
I didnt watch it but i did go the their forums and read the
replies. Seemed like 90% of the people replying were
raising the BS flag and some were ripping on the owner
Rupert Murdoch who also owns Fox News Channel and is
at the head of the worlds largest media empire.

http://ngccommunity.nationalgeographic.com/ngcforums/shows/2009/08/911-science-and-conspiracy.html

Its gonna be on again Saturday at 9 Pm. I think im gonna
watch it, just so i know how hard to laugh at the sheep
who believe it.

The Truth movement is growing by the hour........

Posted by: JimMac Sep 1 2009, 09:51 PM

QUOTE (JimMac @ Sep 1 2009, 08:58 PM) *
I am of the opinion that we who are ' in the know ' got here by a lot of work. I know I did, just sorting through all the bullshit. We are a small fringe element. Nothing with any mass behind it - yet - what I am hoping is that the truth still counts. All we can do is push it. I pushed it this last weekend again at a family and friends party. I found two farmers in the group who responded, cousins. One, a savvy 72 year old farmer from Sask, with his pilots license i might add, responded by saying, he just knew something wasn't right with the story, because those buildings mushroomed down, in his words. My point of view was an affirmation for him about something he'd already been thinking. Then he went on to tell me about how he'd lost trust with government long ago. I hope eventually he might dig around for himself. I planted the seed.


I'm quoting myself here, as an addendum afterthought.

The senior male family member at that party was an uncle who was also a pilot, and WWII vet (tail gunner). I'm going to his birthday party in a few weeks and I want to corner him on the subject of 9/11, to see exactly what he thinks. Born into poverty, he retired with double digit millions made on the back of American corporatism. His view of this situation will be interesting for me.

Posted by: painter Sep 1 2009, 11:35 PM

QUOTE (JimMac @ Sep 1 2009, 06:51 PM) *
I'm quoting myself here, as an addendum afterthought.

The senior male family member at that party was an uncle who was also a pilot, and WWII vet (tail gunner). I'm going to his birthday party in a few weeks and I want to corner him on the subject of 9/11, to see exactly what he thinks. Born into poverty, he retired with double digit millions made on the back of American corporatism. His view of this situation will be interesting for me.

Definitely. Go for it. See what he thinks.

I agree with what you said earlier, JM, the people who are here have gotten here as a result of a lot of work trying to sort through the BS. Most people just don't have the time or inclination. They base their "beliefs" (that is what they are) not on verified evidence or research but on trusting an "authority" to tell them what to think. Thus it has largely always been so.

THAT SAID, there ARE a lot of people out there (we're not quite as much of a "fringe group" as the media WANT us to think we are, get it?) such as the uncle you mentioned who HAS questions, doubts, suspicions. All they need is a little information and guidance -- if they are interested they'll dig into it. I just met a young architectural engineer last weekend who is now reviewing the DVDs I've given him and when he comes to me with questions, I'll have answers or at least suggestions where he can look further into what we know. This is how it works, I think.

Posted by: Daniels Sep 2 2009, 12:11 AM

QUOTE (aerohead @ Sep 2 2009, 09:35 AM) *
National Geographic had a special last night (mon. aug 31).
I didnt watch it but i did go the their forums and read the
replies. Seemed like 90% of the people replying were
raising the BS flag and some were ripping on the owner
Rupert Murdoch who also owns Fox News Channel and is
at the head of the worlds largest media empire.

http://ngccommunity.nationalgeographic.com/ngcforums/shows/2009/08/911-science-and-conspiracy.html

Its gonna be on again Saturday at 9 Pm. I think im gonna
watch it, just so i know how hard to laugh at the sheep
who believe it.

The Truth movement is growing by the hour........


Australian TV showed the BBC hit piece about 7/7 on Monday just gone.

It was meant to be a hit piece against truthers but seemed to be written by a covert truther. It seemed to very much push the question as to what really did happen on 7/7.

My take is that there are sheep in wolves clothing in the perps camp.

Besides, the fact that they™ had to commission a rebuttal to the truthers indicates that the tide they are trying to hold back is indeed coming in.

Posted by: pan May 1 2010, 05:25 AM

Thank you Mr. John Lear for been on this site and for giving us factual informations of what you did in your video. There are very few people in this world that are miss informing the public about you such as an Organiser named Hereward Fenton, he wrote and I quote: Please don't post info about John Lear here. He is an enemy of truth. Contact John Bursill for more info, or just google his name! this is the thread:
http://www.meetup.com/wearechange-oz/messages/boards/thread/8008709

Who is this John Bursill? There is no doubt in me that Hereward Fenton is a stooge because if he knew the facts he would not had made that dodgy statement which to me is nothing less than a defamation of character against Mr. John Lear.

I have since contacted a number of people concerning this attack on the good name of Mr. John Lear, including Edward Mock from
WeAreChangeUtah, including meetup and I want for meetup to either have Hereward Fenton remove that message or have his site in private mode.

I thank Mr. Rob Balsamo for setting the record straight and John I thank you for answering my letters and to me you are a true friend of the people.

Many Blessings,

Pan.

Posted by: SanderO May 1 2010, 10:29 AM

The issue of trusting people when they take any outlier (to the mainstream) position raises many troubling issues.

In the matter of 911 we have been told the official account of the events and have since embarked on a very costly (blood and treasure) and some say anti democratic series of policy initiatives. 911 was a real game changer. This is not in dispute.

We can also make the statement that many have a vested interest in the official account and the subsequent policy initiatives referred to above.

Therefore when individuals or groups surface and question aspects of or in fact the entire account, those vested interests will don one of two things, ignore the critics or attempt to discredit them. But the same reactions would happen when critics of evolution surface with their belief in creationism. Ignore them or refute and discredit them.

So it important to bring this back to science and facts.

The critics of the official 911 account have based their critique on their reading of the evidence available and the claim that much of the evidence has been with held from the public, with the strong implication that the with holding of evidence indicates that evidence would tell a very different story. This is sound logic, but it is not a proof that the with held evidence actually contradicts the official story. So we want to see the video of the pentagon to confirm what may have flown there and so forth. The government could release them and this may prove what happened. They have not. So we simply can't reach any conclusion as tempting as it is to say that the video evidence will contradict the official story.

So the truth movement has had to resort to whatever forensic tools are available and try to extract the truth. What the truth movement HAS done is raise all sorts of questions and show conflicts and contradictions and gaps in the official story. The sum total of these points again raises doubt of the veracity of the official account.

Armed with this mountain of doubt most in the truth movement will build their own "truth narrative" which purports to be science and fact based and fit the available evidence. This leads to hypotheses such as the north path flyover or the controlled demolition of WTC and a whole series of speculations about who planned it, was behind it, carried it out and covered it up.

The speculations are meant to have internal consistency and people who hold a belief in a hypothesis cling to it tenaciously because if elements of their speculation are shown to untrue, or unlikely their internally consistent narrative begins to unfold. And more than that, it appears that clinging to a hypothesis which becomes inflexible in accommodating new evidence appears as if these are belief systems and not scientifically created hypotheses.

So people who raise issues about one thesis or another are now looked at as agents from the government sent to discredit. remember you either ignore or discredit and both sides have only these two options. Of course there is the third option to continually modify the hypothesis to fit all the facts and science as they become available.

This brings me to the notion of what evidence is. We want to believe that evidence is a fingerprint... a unique tell tale of specific cause. While this may be true, it is not always true and evidence can be the result of many causes. If we see a building in pieces on the ground did it collapse, or was it made to fall somehow, or was it poorly designed, or demolished with a wrecking ball or a bomb or it collapse from termites. To make a determination we need to carefully examine the fallen building to look for clues. If we see signs of termites we might conclude that it was from termites eating away and undermining the structure. But that may have been the cause. Some one may have done some work in there and weakened the structure and a strong wind tipped it passed its limit and it collapsed. The point here is that reading the evidence back to a unique cause is difficult, especially when a complex system of hundreds of thousands of elements fails so completely.

Did the towers collapse or were they destroyed by "controlled demolition" which is meant to mean explosives and or something like extreme heat generating process which could destroy the strength of the steel structures.

Personally I believe it was both... the collapse and there was intervention. But the point here is that if you doubt the official story then you believe their was intervention and then you look at the evidence and interpret it to match your hypothesis. If debris is found several hundred feet from the tower it is read as evidence that it was explosively ejected. But it could also get their if it toppled over. The top of a flag pole would end up a distance equal to its height from the bottom if the pole toppled over. And the top would reach a maximum horizontal speed depending on its height. The top of a 100 meter tall pole would reach a horizontal velocity of 22 m/sec and a the top of a 10m pole would reach a horizontal velocity of 7 m/sec. That makes sense if you understand vectors. So when we see debris scattered around the twin towers we can determine what was the maximum horizontal speed they were traveling at to get where they landed. And to do that we need to know how far from the tower they were found and the height in the tower from whence they originated.

If we assume that the furthest found pieces came from the highest locations in the building we would use the elevation of collapse initiation since nothing shot off the top part as it was descending until what appears as an explosion at collapse initiation. This would put the max height for the south tower at +/- 1000' and the north tower at +/- 1150. If we then input the furthest debris located from each tower we find that the maximum horizontal speed was material from the west facade of the north tower and it was around 34 mph. If the debris came from lower such as 1000 feet it would have been as much as 37 mph.
If the entire side fell over like a flag pole the top would reach a speed of 90 mph and land 1350 away, from 1000 ft it would be 85 mph. We know the side did not topple. But it is more likely that sections of the facade fell off and continued moving west at about 30+ mph and landed where they were found. They were likely not ejected at high speeds.

But this would undermine a claim that there was explosive demolition. However this does not mean that there were not explosions or other engineering measures such as high heat to dismantle parts of the structure and cause it to collapse. If the falling of the facade is the correct explanation of that bit of evidence, those who claim explosives have to retreat from one of their "evidence claims" which support their main conclusion.

But how was their conclusion actually arrived at? For one it was based on assuming that the official narrative was a lie. And this depends on how far you want to walk back the "lie" ... the official narrative.

The building did not collapse - therefore they were blown up.
Therefore the planes had nothing to do with their destruction (because they had to be blown up)
And if they had nothing to do with the destruction of the towers then they were "decoys"
If they were decoys then perhaps they were not hijacked and other planes were used or
the hijackers were patsies and duped into flying the decoys
And so on and so on

Now you can look at any aspect of the narrative and find gaping holes in it such as the air speeds reported which seem to defy what those commercial planes could do, or the skill of the hijackers to fly those maneuvers, or the north flyover witnesses which seem to support the no plane hit the pentagon.

Nothing is adding up, but the evidence OF what happened is not there... yet. And this is causing speculation and entrenchment in one truth narrative or another and distrust of others whose own narrative does not support yours - they are labeled disinformation agents sent to... discredit.

Let's try to establish facts and not theories - the theories come later. We're still at the fact finding stage with no help from the government and the corporate world who are making out very nicely as long as the OCT stands.

Posted by: rob balsamo May 1 2010, 10:59 AM

QUOTE (pan @ May 1 2010, 05:25 AM) *
Who is this John Bursill?


http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=19288

Posted by: amazed! May 1 2010, 02:20 PM

Trapster

Call me a maudlin fool, but I would still like to think that there are more good men in society than bad men. More good than wicked, knowing full well that all men are wicked at one time or another.

Yes, there are patriots, no doubt. Some who put country above government, and not vice versa.

What if John Lear IS an old Air America pilot? What does that really mean? Does it mean that he cannot love his country, even though he works for its government?

Air America used to land several airplanes daily at the little Navy Base on the Mekong River, where I was in Vietnam. I know 2 guys who worked for them.

That Lear would advocate for truth being made public, I'm all for him.

Posted by: Quest May 1 2010, 03:46 PM

QUOTE (amazed! @ May 1 2010, 06:20 PM) *
Trapster

Call me a maudlin fool, but I would still like to think that there are more good men in society than bad men. More good than wicked, knowing full well that all men are wicked at one time or another.

Yes, there are patriots, no doubt. Some who put country above government, and not vice versa.

What if John Lear IS an old Air America pilot? What does that really mean? Does it mean that he cannot love his country, even though he works for its government?

Air America used to land several airplanes daily at the little Navy Base on the Mekong River, where I was in Vietnam. I know 2 guys who worked for them.

That Lear would advocate for truth being made public, I'm all for him.



But Lear never answered my posts regarding UFOs and in fact he has been absent from PFT since I asked for detailed answers on the question. I am always wary of people that mix NPHT (No Plane Hit Theory) with fringe stuff like DEWs (directed energy weapons) bringing down the WTC towers or UFOs. IMO, these fringe theories are intentionally mixed in with truth in order to discredit individuals, groups and websites, and until Leary offers detailed explanation on his views of UFOs, I say it's wise to hold him at arm's length.

Posted by: amazed! May 2 2010, 04:28 PM

No objection from me Quest, in that regard. You might be right.

I was merely playing the optimist, an unusual role for myself.

And I have read a paper by Lear many months ago, but have not yet seen the video above, though I will. Been busy lately.

Let's face it, the CIA has been in the dope business for decades, so they play by different rules so to speak.

Holding at an arms' length is always the best policy.

Posted by: rob balsamo May 2 2010, 08:27 PM

QUOTE (Quest @ May 1 2010, 03:46 PM) *
But Lear never answered my posts regarding UFOs and in fact he has been absent from PFT since I asked for detailed answers on the question.


Have you tried to email him?


QUOTE
and until Leary offers detailed explanation on his views of UFOs, I say it's wise to hold him at arm's length.


"Leary"?

Quest, you should know better.

Please don't do it again.

Posted by: nitatutt May 2 2010, 10:58 PM

Just my opinion (I know it means little)

I find Mr. Lear lively and intriguing.

While I don't believe most of the "far out" stuff - my gut instinct is that Mr. Lear is sincere and believes what he says.

Posted by: Quest May 3 2010, 10:39 AM

QUOTE (rob balsamo @ May 3 2010, 01:27 AM) *
Have you tried to email him?




"Leary"?

Quest, you should know better.

Please don't do it again.


Hi Rob, I am not sure what you think I meant with my use of "Leary" instaed of Lear. Did you think I was calling Lear "Leary" as in Timothy Leary? It wasn't intentional and nor was it a Freudian slip. Nothing was meant by it, just a senior moment. I don't insult or make personal attacks. You know me better than that.

As to emailing Lear, he seemed to be an active poster in this thread until I pressed the UFO issue, then...poof! Gone. Have you spoken with him since then? If so, then he must be aware of my posts and questions. I have nothing against the guy. How can I? I don't know him. But as I said earlier, I only became concerned when I heard of his views on UFOs while it is very clear the NWO has been pushing the UFO hoax stuff for decades. And Lear doesn't know this or won't address it?

Posted by: pan May 5 2010, 06:28 PM

QUOTE (aerohead @ Aug 21 2009, 09:05 PM) *
Excellent interview.

And i feel much better about John Lear now.
If he backs the work done here, then he's ok
in my book. Where we get into trouble is when
we create our own theories without alot of proof
but some possibility. I know this first hand with
my F-4 theory whistle.gif laughing1.gif

But it was good to here John support Pilots and
the movement. Excellent


-Aero


Thanks aerohead I second that. Mr. John Lear makes a very good point regarding those 700 boxes of missing Apollo 11 data and videotapes. How they went missing and why is beyond reason. Was the 700 boxes found in a McDonalds?
I also agree we should focus on 911 instead and bring our elected political stooges and their puppeteers as well as those government agents (murderers) involved in this treason to bring them to justice. One very clear example is the 911 terrorists that Mr. Michael Springmann the then US consular for Jeddah. Mr. Michael Springmann was order to give out visas to no less than 100 people including those terrorist from the 911. Mr. Michael Springmann also complained to a number of governments departments but no one help him in fact he also claims that his decision in not giving out visas to those terrorists was reverse by the chief of the consular section. Mr. Michael Springmann also claims that the US consulate in Jeddah was staff by the CIA agents. Mr. Michael Springmann also claim that eleven of the 911 terrorist received their visa from the consulate in Jeddah. President Abama and Kevin Rudd here in Australia, needs to come to the plate and support an investigation into this acts of crime also the question remains, why was Mr. Michael Springmann fired? and why was the files of those applicants destroyed? Was this an inside job? Is this part of the NWO and those belonging to the Rothschild's, to globally control and manipulate the oil? Is the war on terror in Afghanistan just a lie and our troops send there just to protect the oil pipe lines?

Posted by: Quest May 5 2010, 09:01 PM

QUOTE (pan @ May 5 2010, 11:28 PM) *
Thanks aerohead I second that. Mr. John Lear makes a very good point regarding those 700 boxes of missing Apollo 11 data and videotapes. How they went missing and why is beyond reason. Was the 700 boxes found in a McDonalds?
I also agree we should focus on 911 instead and bring our elected political stooges and their puppeteers as well as those government agents (murderers) involved in this treason to bring them to justice. One very clear example is the 911 terrorists that Mr. Michael Springmann the then US consular for Jeddah. Mr. Michael Springmann was order to give out visas to no less than 100 people including those terrorist from the 911. Mr. Michael Springmann also complained to a number of governments departments but no one help him in fact he also claims that his decision in not giving out visas to those terrorists was reverse by the chief of the consular section. Mr. Michael Springmann also claims that the US consulate in Jeddah was staff by the CIA agents. Mr. Michael Springmann also claim that eleven of the 911 terrorist received their visa from the consulate in Jeddah. President Abama and Kevin Rudd here in Australia, needs to come to the plate and support an investigation into this acts of crime also the question remains, why was Mr. Michael Springmann fired? and why was the files of those applicants destroyed? Was this an inside job? Is this part of the NWO and those belonging to the Rothschild's, to globally control and manipulate the oil? Is the war on terror in Afghanistan just a lie and our troops send there just to protect the oil pipe lines?


Pan, am I correct to think you believe men landed on the moon during the Appolo missions?

Would I be correct in thinking you believe we are being visisted by aliens in UFOs?

Posted by: pan May 5 2010, 11:37 PM

Check this statement for the truth regarding 911, including here is also Mr. Edgar Mitchell who was an Astronaut during the Apollo missions.

http://patriotsquestion911.com/

One question that haunts me is to read that Waleed Al Shehri who is alleged to have smashed the plain in the World Trade Centre is still alive, not only that he also claims that he had nothing to do with it. There are also others who were set to be the terrorists in flight 11 and are still alive including, Abdulaziz Al Omari, Asharq Al Awsat, Khalid Al Midhar.

Posted by: pan May 10 2010, 09:09 AM

QUOTE (Trapster @ Aug 21 2009, 10:55 PM) *
Ok, here we go.


3) John Lear has some strange theories on the whole UFO/NASA/Moon/et al. Check out this link: http://www.thelivingmoon.com/47john_lear/menu.html#Photo

He believes that the moon has a very thin atmosphere. No it does not. There is strange crystal structure on the moon. There are some interesting theories about what this may be. Instead, on a radio show, Lear says this may be a 'well of souls' of sorts. A totally off the wall theory that distracts from the more plausible theories. I'd call that Poisoning the Well, dis-info. Which gets us to:


It is being said that a picture is worth a thousand words. This are two official photos taken by NASA NEVER A STRAIGHT ANSWER.
Here it shows Astronaut Mr. Michael Collins, on the left hand side it shows him in a no gravity test, this is done inside a plane. On the right hand side it shows Astronaut Mr. Michael Collins on Gemini 10 doing his space walk. Take a good look and see if this two official NASA pictures look almost identical?


Now here are some educational material that NASA= Never A straight Answer DOES NOT WANT YOU TO KNOW. I like to thank Abovetopsecret.com for this very important evidence which shows anomalies on the moon surface which NASA has kept you from knowing all along. This are the facts that Mr. John Lear has been presenting to us for so many years. Perhaps truth seeker such as Alex Jones, Trapster, etc can explain them instead of making foolish comments concerning our friend Mr. John Lear. I agree that Mr. Lear has got some far out ideas too but I also think that Mr Lear is on the right road concerning many aspect of NASA and their dis-info which has continue for so many years and they are still doing it.

Just click on the link below to see the video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=88_li5XJimk


QUOTE (Trapster @ Aug 21 2009, 10:55 PM) *
He believes that the moon has a very thin atmosphere. No it does not.



Boston University
Contact: Shauna LaFauci, 617/353-2399, slafauci@bu.edu
Edited by Pan

BOSTON UNIVERSITY CENTER FOR SPACE PHYSICS DISCOVERS LUNAR SODIUM TAIL
Boston, Mass. -- Boston University astronomers announced today the discovery of an enormous tail of sodium gas stretching to great distances from the moon. The observations were made at the McDonald Observatory in Fort Davis, Texas, on nights following the Leonid meteor shower of November 1998. The tail of sodium gas was seen to distances of at least 500,000 miles from the moon, changing its appearances over three consecutive nights. These results were presented on Tuesday, June 1st, at the Annual Spring Meeting of the American Geophysical Union (AGU) in Boston. Complete papers will appear in the AGU journal Geophysical Research Letters in its June 15th edition.

Since the days of NASA's Apollo Program of lunar, scientists have known that the moon has a very thin atmosphere. "It is one continuously being produced by evaporation of surface materials, and then continuously being lost by escape or impact back onto the surface," said Michael Mendillo, professor of astronomy. Such processes act daily, and so while there is always some atmosphere present, the various gases are being cycled through it. It is a "transient atmosphere" similar to the ones found in comets.

Read more http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news023.html

Posted by: Sanders May 10 2010, 12:36 PM

The elite have insulated themselves from attack by incorporating themselves with the Jewish people. They loaned the Jews their pagan hexogram (Megan David). They sold the Jews a notion of a return to a Palestinian homeland.

So attacks against the elite and their agenda fall on the Jewish people, who haven't a clue what this is all about, although many Jews buy into the propaganda and consider themselves Zionists.

Probably over half of the "Jews" trying to run the world aren't Jews - and the Jewish half aren't really Jews either. So we should quit calling them Jews, 'cause they aren't. They're something else - Kabbalists? Rich-f&#"s who would grab onto any religious cause if it furthered theirs? Name them what you will.

Any theory of who is trying to run the world which ignores the prevalence of American tycoons of elite Norman ancestry, or the Episcopalian make-up of the Skull-and-Bones fraternity and the higher-ups in US Intelligence, and why these people would support Israel, doesn't grasp the big picture IMO. So, no complaints from me regarding Alex Jones' focus on things happening in America and what they mean to Americans. - After all, he did make a whole documentary on the USS Liberty incident.

Posted by: Quest May 11 2010, 09:52 PM

Pan, 2 questions;

1. Do you believe the UFO phenomenon to be a result of aliens flying the spacecraft to earth?

2. Do you deny that the NWO has had a hand in pushing the myth of alien flow spacecraft?

Posted by: pan May 11 2010, 10:23 PM

QUOTE (Quest @ May 11 2010, 08:52 PM) *
Pan, 2 questions;

1. Do you believe the UFO phenomenon to be a result of aliens flying the spacecraft to earth?

2. Do you deny that the NWO has had a hand in pushing the myth of alien flow spacecraft?


You must be reading something a couple decades old.

Posted by: pan May 11 2010, 11:07 PM

QUOTE (Quest @ May 11 2010, 09:52 PM) *
Pan, 2 questions;

1. Do you believe the UFO phenomenon to be a result of aliens flying the spacecraft to earth?

2. Do you deny that the NWO has had a hand in pushing the myth of alien flow spacecraft?


Read my post


QUOTE (pan @ May 10 2010, 09:09 AM) *
It is being said that a picture is worth a thousand words. This are two official photos taken by NASA NEVER A STRAIGHT ANSWER.
Here it shows Astronaut Mr. Michael Collins, on the left hand side it shows him in a no gravity test, this is done inside a plane. On the right hand side it shows Astronaut Mr. Michael Collins on Gemini 10 doing his space walk. Take a good look and see if this two official NASA pictures look almost identical?


Now here are some educational material that NASA= Never A straight Answer DOES NOT WANT YOU TO KNOW. I like to thank Abovetopsecret.com for this very important evidence which shows anomalies on the moon surface which NASA has kept you from knowing all along. This are the facts that Mr. John Lear has been presenting to us for so many years. Perhaps truth seeker such as Alex Jones, Trapster, etc can explain them instead of making foolish comments concerning our friend Mr. John Lear. I agree that Mr. Lear has got some far out ideas too but I also think that Mr Lear is on the right road concerning many aspect of NASA and their dis-info which has continue for so many years and they are still doing it.

Just click on the link below to see the video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=88_li5XJimk





Boston University
Contact: Shauna LaFauci, 617/353-2399, slafauci@bu.edu
Edited by Pan

BOSTON UNIVERSITY CENTER FOR SPACE PHYSICS DISCOVERS LUNAR SODIUM TAIL
Boston, Mass. -- Boston University astronomers announced today the discovery of an enormous tail of sodium gas stretching to great distances from the moon. The observations were made at the McDonald Observatory in Fort Davis, Texas, on nights following the Leonid meteor shower of November 1998. The tail of sodium gas was seen to distances of at least 500,000 miles from the moon, changing its appearances over three consecutive nights. These results were presented on Tuesday, June 1st, at the Annual Spring Meeting of the American Geophysical Union (AGU) in Boston. Complete papers will appear in the AGU journal Geophysical Research Letters in its June 15th edition.

Since the days of NASA's Apollo Program of lunar, scientists have known that the moon has a very thin atmosphere. "It is one continuously being produced by evaporation of surface materials, and then continuously being lost by escape or impact back onto the surface," said Michael Mendillo, professor of astronomy. Such processes act daily, and so while there is always some atmosphere present, the various gases are being cycled through it. It is a "transient atmosphere" similar to the ones found in comets.

Read more http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news023.html

Posted by: aerohead May 19 2010, 02:48 AM

Aj is legit, but gets a bit over enthusiastic.

Other life is out there, from nothing you get nothing,
energy cannot be created nor destroyed therefore the
source of the universe is eternal energy. God.

He can, and i believe he has, created other life. Why wouldnt he
when he created this ........




Taken from the Hubble, fixed on one point in the sky, you are actually
looking back in time with this photo, and it shows thousands of
other galaxies, not planets or suns, galaxies of millions and billions
of suns and planets. yes there is life out there. How can there not be?
And this Photo is of a very small fraction of the sky.



Moon landings? Dont know, dont really care. I think they were real.

MSM and Obama are puppets of the NWO, just like all recent Presidents.

9/11 was an inside job.


My 2 cents worth of making sense of it all.
Cheers and relax, there is a purpose for all things
great and small.

Posted by: dMole May 19 2010, 03:21 AM

Most of the off-topic Alex Jones "discussion" has been moved here:

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=20026&st=20

Posted by: pan May 19 2010, 04:59 AM

QUOTE (dMole @ May 19 2010, 02:21 AM) *
Most of the off-topic Alex Jones "discussion" has been moved here:

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=20026&st=20


So as I understand it from now on any further articles to do with Mr. Alex Jones will be placed in that url yes? I understand, thanks for your message and well done.
I like to know if we can continue in here with discussions on NASA, Moon abnormalities, etc? or do we need anthother topic? As for me I be willing to talk further regarding this facinating topic in here. What you say for us to do?

Pan. handsdown.gif

Posted by: pan May 19 2010, 06:46 AM

QUOTE (aerohead @ May 19 2010, 01:48 AM) *
Aj is legit, but gets a bit over enthusiastic.

Other life is out there, from nothing you get nothing,
energy cannot be created nor destroyed therefore the
source of the universe is eternal energy. God.

He can, and i believe he has, created other life. Why wouldnt he
when he created this ........




Taken from the Hubble, fixed on one point in the sky, you are actually
looking back in time with this photo, and it shows thousands of
other galaxies, not planets or suns, galaxies of millions and billions
of suns and planets. yes there is life out there. How can there not be?
And this Photo is of a very small fraction of the sky.



Moon landings? Dont know, dont really care. I think they were real.

MSM and Obama are puppets of the NWO, just like all recent Presidents.

9/11 was an inside job.


My 2 cents worth of making sense of it all.
Cheers and relax, there is a purpose for all things
great and small.


Very intersting points of view, great picture from the Hubble too.

Posted by: pan May 19 2010, 06:49 AM

Click for: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=118776534810576
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=118776534810576

Posted by: pan May 19 2010, 07:02 AM

Ex-defence minister defends aliens, says Hawking wrong


Response to Stephen Hawking Comments - April 26, 2010

It is unfortunate that Stephen Hawking has added his voice to a growing chorus of xenophobia and fear regarding what he terms "Aliens."

Secondly, as a scientist, he should know better: Any interstellar civilization would possess such technologies that the meager resources of Earth would be unneeded. If you can travel faster than the speed of light, you can manifest what is needed. Period. Moreover, IF they were hostile- since ETs are already visiting Earth

Read more:http://www.disclosureproject.org/email-update-april-27-2010-response-to-hawking.shtml

Posted by: pan May 19 2010, 05:21 PM

Is the CIA Stonewalling?
Written RICHARD HALL May-June 1981

Edited by Pan.

The Government and UFOs ''Further scientific investigation of UFOs is unwarranted. "--Ai) Force. 1980
Perhaps most disturbing is the very fact that after thirty-two years, a small but significant percentage of UFOs
still remains unidentified. While the government has been concerned with the psychological danger the UFO
phenomenon poses, it has been unwilling to consider the prospect that some UFOs pose an actual physical
threat. Fearful of generating undue concern, the government has deliberately chosen to debunk UFO
reports and has misinformed the public as to the true importance of the phenomenon.
Unconventional aerial objects that boast unlimited and unrestricted access to our most sensitive nuclear
installations-and which can render inoperable the instrumentation, communication/ weapon systems of
American-made jets, or which can shut down and restart at will sophisticated hydraulic equipmentdo
warrant further scientific study.


Read more http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:m345pakYaOcJ:www.nsa.gov/public_info/_files/ufo/gov_and_ufos.pdf+Is+the+CIA+Stonewalling%3F+RICHARD+HALL+May-June+1981&hl=en&gl=au&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESj7PXDzMNIwmJuVE7hTX9DBbxojWHZ8m4ahTxmSG6lAkQhkiyc1zciTOl3KH3aQx9BP0GSYKB156OdO5iT5cRfg9q0njZDy0v6_LDH4MJFo_ZUUFL_MgybUUEAiAxLYjVT9ay2A&sig=AHIEtbRLMXN0xchpIfBfZRGbVEuDjTYpJw

Posted by: johnlear May 19 2010, 06:36 PM

QUOTE (Quest @ Apr 29 2010, 06:46 PM) *
But Lear never answered my posts regarding UFOs and in fact he has been absent from PFT since I asked for detailed answers on the question. I am always wary of people that mix NPHT (No Plane Hit Theory) with fringe stuff like DEWs (directed energy weapons) bringing down the WTC towers or UFOs. IMO, these fringe theories are intentionally mixed in with truth in order to discredit individuals, groups and websites, and until Leary offers detailed explanation on his views of UFOs, I say it's wise to hold him at arm's length.


Hello Quest,


If its not too much trouble could you please post your questions again. I have not been paying attention lately.

And please accept my apologies for not answering immediately.

Thanks again,

John Lear

Posted by: johnlear May 19 2010, 07:05 PM

QUOTE (pan @ May 17 2010, 10:02 AM) *
Ex-defence minister defends aliens, says Hawking wrong


Response to Stephen Hawking Comments - April 26, 2010

It is unfortunate that Stephen Hawking has added his voice to a growing chorus of xenophobia and fear regarding what he terms "Aliens."

Secondly, as a scientist, he should know better: Any interstellar civilization would possess such technologies that the meager resources of Earth would be unneeded. If you can travel faster than the speed of light, you can manifest what is needed. Period. Moreover, IF they were hostile- since ETs are already visiting Earth

Read more:http://www.disclosureproject.org/email-update-april-27-2010-response-to-hawking.shtml



Hello Pan,

There are good aliens and bad aliens just like there are good earthlings and bad earthlings. The bad aliens gave us some real nasty offensive weapons one of which was the weapon that destroyed the WTC.

It used molecular disassociation to reduce matter to it barest component which is why there was only 1 story left instead of 13 stories as in a controlled demolition. All of the dust particles none of which was more than 80 microns in size was what molecular disassociation does to matter: steel, concrete etc. We have 36 offensive weapons orbiting platforms plus 2 Naval command posts about the same size as the ISS.

If you ever wondered why it takes the shuttle 3 days (instead of the Russians who make it there in 30 minutes including docking) to get to the ISS its because they are stopping at those platforms with food and supplies. And if your wondering why it takes the shuttle 2 days to get back which should only take 54 minutes to deorbit and land its because they are distributing more food and supplies that were brought up by the Russians a couple of days before the shuttle arrives at the ISS.

Its a real nice cozy arrangement they have there and is the reason that, unknown by the public there are currently about 5000 astronauts current and qualified which include the Army, Navy, Air Force, NASA and a few other secret teams. They all operate under US Space Command which was taken over by the Navy in, I think, 1992.

Cold war? There never was any such thing in reality. All the threats and hoopla was for public consumption. We have always been close allies to the Russians.

Posted by: pan May 19 2010, 10:02 PM

QUOTE (johnlear @ May 19 2010, 06:05 PM) *
Hello Pan,

There are good aliens and bad aliens just like there are good earthlings and bad earthlings. The bad aliens gave us some real nasty offensive weapons one of which was the weapon that destroyed the WTC.

It used molecular disassociation to reduce matter to it barest component which is why there was only 1 story left instead of 13 stories as in a controlled demolition. All of the dust particles none of which was more than 80 microns in size was what molecular disassociation does to matter: steel, concrete etc. We have 36 offensive weapons orbiting platforms plus 2 Naval command posts about the same size as the ISS.

If you ever wondered why it takes the shuttle 3 days (instead of the Russians who make it there in 30 minutes including docking) to get to the ISS its because they are stopping at those platforms with food and supplies. And if your wondering why it takes the shuttle 2 days to get back which should only take 54 minutes to deorbit and land its because they are distributing more food and supplies that were brought up by the Russians a couple of days before the shuttle arrives at the ISS.

Its a real nice cozy arrangement they have there and is the reason that, unknown by the public there are currently about 5000 astronauts current and qualified which include the Army, Navy, Air Force, NASA and a few other secret teams. They all operate under US Space Command which was taken over by the Navy in, I think, 1992.

Cold war? There never was any such thing in reality. All the threats and hoopla was for public consumption. We have always been close allies to the Russians.


Dear Mr. John Lear,

Thank you very much for your comments its a great Honor for me to be associated with this forum in particular with you too, Mr. Lear I am just overwhelmed by comments to this posting as well. I also agree with you one hundred percent that, No air planes crashed on 911. If it were there would be record of of takeoffs from both of the two air planes American 11 and American 77. Also from the info that I have been able to obtain to the best of my knowledge there is no information of tower release,no Bureau of statistics records, no photos. The whole thing to me is very suspicious and I wonder why the previous president and now the current President Obama does not wish to have this matter investigated.

Sir If I can take a minute of your time I like to talk on another topic here, it has to do with the pictures taken by the Lunar Orbiter which no one in the mainstream media talks about not even that stooge, Alex Jones. I would like to ask you what you make about Missing Lunar Orbiter Tapes Found In an Abandoned McDonald's.
Mr. Lear do you have any idea how those tapes could had possible had made their way in a take away food store? and why? You know sir I have read a number of posts even in here stating that UFO Is being made up by those in the NWO. To me this is just complete nonsense being said by idiots such as that Zionist Alex Jones and their Sheep's just to misinform the public so we are not aware what is really going on.

I have also included the video from the Lunar Orbiter with the pictures that mikesingh of the Abovetopsecret.com discovered
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=88_li5XJimk

Written by mikesingh October 09, 2008.
Edited by Pan.
Here are the uncensored Moon Images taken by the Lunar Orbiter!
According to Arizona State University, the Lunar Orbiter images were all digitally scanned at 400 dpi at the Lunar and Planetary Institute in Houston. Whole images were too large to be scanned at once and were broken up into four sections.
From the data and resources about each lunar orbiter image found in Anderson and Miller (1971), they obtained information about the side length, altitude and emission angle of the images they scanned. To calculate the resolution of each image they followed several steps. They first calculated the resolution of images with an emission angle of less than 10° by dividing the side length of each image by the number of pixels, and then calculated the distance to the surface by dividing the altitude by the cosine of the emission angle. The resolution of low-emission angle images was plotted against their distance to the surface. From this was obtained the best-fit equation: Corrected Resolution = -0.0023272 + 0.014376 * Distance to Surface and applied it to the remaining images to get the corrected resolution.

Photo Credit: Steve Jurvetson from the, Above Top Secret



Posted by: albertchampion May 19 2010, 10:14 PM

i think it odd, i have lived on this planet, the usa, for decades.

still, i continue to feel as if an extraterrestrial. an alien life form.

i encounter very few individuals who share my pov or my sense of integrity and honor.

Posted by: johnlear May 19 2010, 10:35 PM

QUOTE (albertchampion @ May 18 2010, 01:14 AM) *
i think it odd, i have lived on this planet, the usa, for decades.

still, i continue to feel as if an extraterrestrial. an alien life form.

i encounter very few individuals who share my pov or my sense of integrity and honor.


Hello Albertchampion,

Very few, if any of us are from this planet. We go through hundred if not thousands of reincarnations trying to get our soul matured to the point that we can live our lives with integrity; and without envy, hate or greed and to express our love for our family members everyday. After we can do that automatically we are released to go play with the other adults in this universe.

Meanwhile we slog it out lifetime after lifetime on this and other planets trying to get our souls released to the point where we can go somewhere else by ourselves.

So don't feel like the Lone Ranger, all of us are from or have been to other planets and some have distant memories of those existences like some have memories of previous lifetimes like that little 2 year old kid who vividly remembered, to the tiniest detail, of getting shot down over Io Jima. That was in the news a couple of days ago.

Posted by: Quest May 19 2010, 10:36 PM

QUOTE (johnlear @ May 20 2010, 12:05 AM) *
Hello Pan,

There are good aliens and bad aliens just like there are good earthlings and bad earthlings. The bad aliens gave us some real nasty offensive weapons one of which was the weapon that destroyed the WTC.

It used molecular disassociation to reduce matter to it barest component which is why there was only 1 story left instead of 13 stories as in a controlled demolition. All of the dust particles none of which was more than 80 microns in size was what molecular disassociation does to matter: steel, concrete etc. We have 36 offensive weapons orbiting platforms plus 2 Naval command posts about the same size as the ISS.

If you ever wondered why it takes the shuttle 3 days (instead of the Russians who make it there in 30 minutes including docking) to get to the ISS its because they are stopping at those platforms with food and supplies. And if your wondering why it takes the shuttle 2 days to get back which should only take 54 minutes to deorbit and land its because they are distributing more food and supplies that were brought up by the Russians a couple of days before the shuttle arrives at the ISS.

Its a real nice cozy arrangement they have there and is the reason that, unknown by the public there are currently about 5000 astronauts current and qualified which include the Army, Navy, Air Force, NASA and a few other secret teams. They all operate under US Space Command which was taken over by the Navy in, I think, 1992.

Cold war? There never was any such thing in reality. All the threats and hoopla was for public consumption. We have always been close allies to the Russians.



Hello John, can I ask you a few questions?

1. Is it your belief that Architects and Egineers' assertion of the WTC towers were control demolitioned is incorrect?
http://AE911truth.org

2. Are you aware of the CFR's involvement in the 1938 alien invasion hoax in the CBS radio broadcast of "The War Of The Worlds"?

3. Are you aware that Hitler's scientists (and the US)were alledgedly trying to construct aircraft resembling saucer-shaped UFO's?
http://www.erichufschmid.net/TFC/FlyingSaucers/FlyingSaucers.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8RNLbxbIeo
The NAZI saucer that landed on Mars
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHLXKXxV7YU&feature=related

4. Are you aware that Prescott Bush and his New World Order business buddies in part helped build Hitler's war machine?

Posted by: johnlear May 19 2010, 11:01 PM

QUOTE (pan @ May 18 2010, 01:02 AM) *
Dear Mr. John Lear,



Sir If I can take a minute of your time I like to talk on another topic here, it has to do with the pictures taken by the Lunar Orbiter which no one in the mainstream media talks about not even that stooge, Alex Jones. I would like to ask you what you make about Missing Lunar Orbiter Tapes Found In an Abandoned McDonald's.
Mr. Lear do you have any idea how those tapes could had possible had made their way in a take away food store? and why? You know sir I have read a number of posts even in here stating that UFO Is being made up by those in the NWO. To me this is just complete nonsense being said by idiots such as that Zionist Alex Jones and their Sheep's just to misinform the public so we are not aware what is really going on.


I have no idea whats behind the McDonalds Lunar Orbiter scam. It may be an attempt to link them with the 700 missing tapes from the Apollo missions. There were no tapes because there was no Apollo mission that landed or even orbited the moon and I could give you several hundred reasons why that would not have been possible.

As far as Lunar Orbiter tapes I have the best collection of LO photos including one that, although airbrushed, contains so much information that they dare not release it. It was a photo of a city 125 miles north west of Copernicus looking north near Tobias Meyer LO-3-123H3. I have a 2 foot by 3 foot enlargement in my den. For those who have any photo interpretation background it knocks them for a loop. I have other LO photos that clearly (to me and others with photo interpretation experience) shows very large cities.

All photos in the Lunar Orbiter series taken between 1965 and 1967 where not as carefully airbrushed as those we see from Clementine and other recent photo expeditions. Now it is all done digitally and automatically. The way they hide cities on the near side of the moon from telescopes are camouflaged with holograms or other similar devices. My best 2 examples are of Endymion and Petavius B.

So in answer to your question I believe the McDonalds missing photos are to confuse the public with the missing 700 reels of the faked Apollo mission. Through the resources of thelivingmoon.com team we asked for a first look at one and were denied. The first released photo from McDonalds had already been airbrushed so it was no big find.

To quote one of Hoaglands friends, "NASA didn't lie abut a few things; they lied about everything."

Posted by: pan May 19 2010, 11:32 PM

QUOTE (Quest @ May 19 2010, 09:36 PM) *
Hello John, can I ask you a few questions?

1. Is it your belief that Architects and Egineers' assertion of the WTC towers were control demolitioned is incorrect?
http://AE911truth.org

2. Are you aware of the CFR's involvement in the 1938 alien invasion hoax in the CBS radio broadcast of "The War Of The Worlds"?

3. Are you aware that Hitler's scientists (and the US)were alledgedly trying to construct aircraft resembling saucer-shaped UFO's?
http://www.erichufschmid.net/TFC/FlyingSaucers/FlyingSaucers.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8RNLbxbIeo
The NAZI saucer that landed on Mars
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHLXKXxV7YU&feature=related

4. Are you aware that Prescott Bush and his New World Order business buddies in part helped build Hitler's war machine?

Hey Quest I got a few questions which you have never answer me and you have being avoiding them all along and those questions that I posted here has being send to the one that I started with Alex Jones so while you are waiting for your questions to be answered can you do the proper thing and answer mines too, here is the thread just follow the dots
................................................................ http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=20026&st=20

Posted by: johnlear May 19 2010, 11:59 PM

QUOTE (Trapster @ Aug 27 2009, 01:55 AM) *
Ok, I have stayed away from this because I thought things needed to cool down a bit.


Point of evidence:
Honestly, do ya really think that there is an underground 'Sub Canal' dug from the Pacific to a lake in Nevada where an Undersea Warfare base for subs is located? Just ponder it, I don't want a full blown argument.
http://www.thelivingmoon.com/47john_lear/02files/Navy_Secrets.html#Nevada

The 'evidence' presented here is pretty thin: A sign about Undersea Warfare and a very secretive guard.

Well, I think think of a very logical reason why the US Navy would want to locate a test and research center in a lake in Nevada---Security from prying eyes. Torpedoes, Sonar, SEAL tactics, propulsion systems (propellers), and more could be observed from Soviet Subs if tested in any Ocean. Nevada is the site of other 'secret' military bases, so the location of a Navy testing center is not that far fetched. But, I'd call saying that there is a deep underground canal linking the lake with the ocean a real trip in creative thinking. (With all due respect Mr. Lear)



Thanks Trapster,

Nobody dug a trench from Monterey Bay to Hawthorne. Most of the western and part of the eastern U.S. sit on a plate covering the Pacific Ocean. Subs are able to go to Nevada, California, Idaho, Oregon and Washington. The reason they go to Hawthorne is because right across the street from the Naval Undersea Warfare Center at Hawthorne is the U.S. Army arsenal where specific armament including missiles are made. Rather than ship them to the west coast they just push them onto an elevator that goes down 4300 ft to the Pacific Ocean and load them there. I have 4 sources for this information. A recent source said he saw a nuclear sub at China Lake. Another source says his father worked on nuclear subs in St. Louis.

On discussing that with someome who knows the shipping lanes very well in and around St. Louis says that explains why dredging operations in the area go on 24/7. He was baffled by this because most of the river traffic draws 3 or 4 feet at the max, so why would they be dredging? The nuclear sub is the explanation. They enter from the gulf and cruise up the Mississippi.

One of the most interesting Naval bases is the one at Lake Tahoe. This one is serviced by an elevator also but I can't figure out why at Lake Tahoe. Winter skiing perhaps?

Both the Thresher and Scorpion were lost exploring the Pacific Ocean beneath the western U.S. Their cover stories were well concocted and nobody has any reason to think otherwise. And they have held up for almost 50 years now.

QUOTE
And, you know how the press loves to go at people who talk about UFO's and Alien Civilizations. Just ask Presidential candidate Kucinich about how they tore into him.
.

Yes, Some of us are real ""UFO nuts."

QUOTE
(Personally, I hope that some of what Lear says about that subject is true, it'd be fun to talk to an alien one day, ask him how his civilization coped with the challenges we face here on Earth)

My last words on the subject (truly)
The Pilot's for 9/11 Truth is a powerful organization. It is guaranteed to attract both positive and negative attention once some of its big research projects are completed. Projects involving solid mathematical analysis, data computation and principals of science. But, you can be sure that the first 'press' questions will be directed toward the subject of 'crazy UFO conspiracy theories'.


I should have realized 911 was a scam the first day. But I bought it hook, line and sinker for 4 years until I started reading some different theories. Of course then I changed my opinion and I was even invited by Morgan Reynolds to write a 15 page affidavit to the New York District Court in opposition to the motion to dismiss by one of the 21 parties charged with their connection with 911. Of course the judge took one day to dismiss the suit. Talk about sheer, outright dishonesty. My affidavit contained the details of why no Boeing 767 could have crashed into the WTC. I had excellent references but he shot those down too.

QUOTE
To Mr Lear, I did not mean to insult you or your contributions. I see from your response that you have a great sense of humor and took it lightly. You have presented a truly astonishing body of 'theory' on other sites. Perhaps there is much more to mankind that I know. Perhaps I am paranoid in a negative way. Given the gravity (slight pun) of the magnitude of the events of 9/11, I simply caution any professional group to be weary of any 'appearance' of 'crazy theories'. As we know, perception is reality.


Not to worry. I even invited John Alexander over to my house for dinner and while I didn't convince him the Lazar story is true, I did give him enough facts, "to give it a little more thought."

QUOTE
Cheers John Lear, thanks for taking time here. Cheers Pilots for 9/11 Truth, keep up the good work.


Thanks, and I have told Rob that anytime I become a liability to just toss my ass out.

Posted by: johnlear May 20 2010, 01:02 AM

QUOTE (Quest @ May 18 2010, 01:36 AM) *
Hello John, can I ask you a few questions?

1. Is it your belief that Architects and Egineers' assertion of the WTC towers were control demolitioned is incorrect?
http://AE911truth.org


There were some parts of the WTC that had controlled demo. There is no doubt about that. But the main destruction came from a weapon on an orbiting platform. You should understand that the A&E knows nothing about any space based weapons involved in the equation.

QUOTE
2. Are you aware of the CFR's involvement in the 1938 alien invasion hoax in the CBS radio broadcast of "The War Of The Worlds"?


No, I didn't know that.

QUOTE
3. Are you aware that Hitler's scientists (and the US)were alledgedly trying to construct aircraft resembling saucer-shaped UFO's?


yes.

QUOTE
http://www.erichufschmid.net/TFC/FlyingSaucers/FlyingSaucers.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8RNLbxbIeo
The NAZI saucer that landed on Mars
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHLXKXxV7YU&feature=related


No, didn't know about the Mars landing.

QUOTE
4. Are you aware that Prescott Bush and his New World Order business buddies in part helped build Hitler's war machine?


Of course.

Posted by: johnlear May 20 2010, 01:22 AM

QUOTE (Quest @ May 10 2010, 12:52 AM) *
Pan, 2 questions;


Although you asked Pan these questions let me throw in my opinion

QUOTE
1. Do you believe the UFO phenomenon to be a result of aliens flying the spacecraft to earth?


Yes, there are literally billions of different types of aliens. Many of those visit earth. One of the problems in trying to understand this is that you are told by mainstream science that the universe is 17 billion years old. This is incorrect. The universe is infinite, a concept very hard to believe but nevertheless true.

There are also a billion times a billion earths similar to ours. Some are more advanced than ours some less advanced.

QUOTE
2. Do you deny that the NWO has had a hand in pushing the myth of alien flow spacecraft?


The myth of alien flow spacecraft is not a myth. The NWO, whatever that may be, does everything it can to suppress that information. Earth people are led to believe in a big bang. They want to believe there is a beginning. This is hard to believe until you reach a higher level and start to learn more about all the universes there are. They want to think there is one universe and that a 'God' created it. They don't have the slightest idea about how big it really is and all the inhabitants there are.

Posted by: paranoia May 20 2010, 01:47 AM

mr.lear,

since we have the privilege of you (and your wealth of experience and knowledge) here for a moment, if i may divert briefly to a related but seperate topic, i was wondering if u could share any thoughts on that last shuttle mission that (allegedly) blew up upon re-entry. i understand there was for the first time ever, an israeli airforce captain onboard that shuttle. i was wondering if and how any of that may (or may not) fit in with -

QUOTE
If you ever wondered why it takes the shuttle 3 days (instead of the Russians who make it there in 30 minutes including docking) to get to the ISS its because they are stopping at those platforms with food and supplies. And if your wondering why it takes the shuttle 2 days to get back which should only take 54 minutes to deorbit and land its because they are distributing more food and supplies that were brought up by the Russians a couple of days before the shuttle arrives at the ISS.

Its a real nice cozy arrangement they have there and is the reason that, unknown by the public there are currently about 5000 astronauts current and qualified which include the Army, Navy, Air Force, NASA and a few other secret teams. They all operate under US Space Command which was taken over by the Navy in, I think, 1992.


i've often wondered if maybe not all the people who were supposed to be on that shuttle, were actually on it when it disintegrated. i've also wondered if maybe there is alot more going on the space station (or secret space stations) than just "scientific research". any ideas/insights you might have into things of that regard would be much appreciated.


also, what are your thoughts (if any) on this?
http://www.dod.gov/pubs/space20010111.html

thanks (in advance) for your time sir,
salute.gif

Posted by: johnlear May 20 2010, 01:58 AM

QUOTE (amazed! @ Apr 29 2010, 05:20 PM) *
Trapster

Call me a maudlin fool, but I would still like to think that there are more good men in society than bad men. More good than wicked, knowing full well that all men are wicked at one time or another.

Yes, there are patriots, no doubt. Some who put country above government, and not vice versa.

What if John Lear IS an old Air America pilot? What does that really mean? Does it mean that he cannot love his country, even though he works for its government?


I just wanted to clear this up. I worked for CASI (Continental Air Services, Inc) not Air America. We both did the same work during the secret war in Laos. Below is my Congressional commendation for that work. I flew 560 mission of which half were combat and got shot down once.


By http://profile.imageshack.us/user/johnlear at 2010-05-19

QUOTE
Air America used to land several airplanes daily at the little Navy Base on the Mekong River, where I was in Vietnam. I know 2 guys who worked for them.


CASI was based in Vientiane and work mostly in Laos with a few 'accidental' flights into China.

QUOTE
That Lear would advocate for truth being made public, I'm all for him.


I would like to see the truth made public in my lifetime (I am 67) but it seems doubtful. Both the NAZI's and Israel have almost total control over our country. As to the NAZI's and Israel working together you would be surprised as to who is working for who and for what. The problem with exposing the truth is 'how'?

Posted by: albertchampion May 20 2010, 02:04 AM

i like the way you picked up on my thoughts of aloneness.

i think it is the mark of "seeker".

tell me, wasn't your dad's most interesting invention the learavia radio?

i still have one of the originals.

Posted by: johnlear May 20 2010, 02:20 AM

QUOTE (paranoia @ May 18 2010, 04:47 AM) *
mr.lear,

since we have the privilege of you (and your wealth of experience and knowledge) here for a moment, if i may divert briefly to a related but seperate topic, i was wondering if u could share any thoughts on that last shuttle mission that (allegedly) blew up upon re-entry. i understand there was for the first time ever, an israeli airforce captain onboard that shuttle. i was wondering if and how any of that may (or may not) fit in with -


The space shuttle was built with 10 seats. All we see are 6 or 7 astronauts board. There are obviously 3 or 4 additional astronauts going and coming back that are not known by the public. The first shuttle accident was sabotage. One of the hold down clamps was rigged not to release. It eventually broke loose but was the cause of the accident. The second was obviously intentionally shot down. All I know about that mission was that it was an Isreali secret mission. How or why it was destroyed, I don't know.

QUOTE
i've often wondered if maybe not all the people who were supposed to be on that shuttle, were actually on it when it disintegrated. i've also wondered if maybe there is a lot more going on the space station (or secret space stations) than just "scientific research". any ideas/insights you might have into things of that regard would be much appreciated.


We have 36 orbiting offensive weapons orbiting platforms including 2 Navy orbiting command platforms similar to the ISS.

Like I said before there are a least 3 or 4 extra seats and may be even more on the shuttle. The U.S. has also several man-rated rockets that send up additional astronauts. I don't know how they are brought back but we have at least one STO (single stage to orbit) craft that can takeoff into orbit, dock, and return to earth.


QUOTE
also, what are your thoughts (if any) on this?
http://www.dod.gov/pubs/space20010111.html


Public propaganda.

Posted by: dMole May 20 2010, 03:25 AM

QUOTE (johnlear @ Aug 22 2009, 11:11 AM) *
I was not involved in any way with the black bird except and all consuming interest. I knew several of the Lockheed test pilots. One was Darryl Greenamyer who checked me out in the F-104. Another was Bill Weaver who I flew copilot for delivering an L-1011 from Marana to Cambridge, England for Orbital Sciences. I would have been permanent copilot for the Pegasus Program but the Pentagon refused to issue a security clearance. If I remember correctly the exact statement to Lockheed was, "Under no circumstances will John Lear ever be issued any more clearances." I think the Pentagon was over reacting. smile.gif

Hi John- and thanks for your [A-12-ish] response long ago.

Hmmm... Orbital Sciences was one of the "local competition" that tried to "recruit" me away from my then-DoD-contracted employer... The interesting portion is that I had just moved across several hundred miles, VERY recently changed cell phone numbers, and then suddenly- a recruiter from Orbital Sciences just "found" my "NEW?" cell phone number out of "the blue..."

Are you currently at liberty to elaborate on the DoD "Under no circumstances..." thing that you alluded to above, John? If not- I completely understand... salute.gif cheers.gif

EDIT: Feel free to contact me via PM if you feel more comfortable that way, Mr. Lear.

Posted by: johnlear May 20 2010, 04:06 AM

QUOTE
name='Quest' date='Aug 28 2009, 04:39 AM' post='10775912']
Do you guys mind if I weigh in on this?

I am not going to tackle the credibility issue because any supposed "tie" with the CIA but rather I'm going to hit it from another angle.

I have not yet read John Lear's complete take on UFO's but what I gather from his "some are real (ufos) and some aren't real (man-made)" statement, he does in fact believe that other-worldly beings have visisted our planet and may in fact still be doing so.


True.

QUOTE
My issue with that is that like Trapster, I have seen the UFO topic, along with "grassy-knollers" phrase brought up by the 911 perp's media again and again in attempts to try and discredit a truthseeker or the movement as a whole. Case in point, recently and ironically, I was actually guilty of passing on a video in the Pilot's "Lobby" forum which contained UFO material. In hindsight, the guy in this video is clearly a fraud.


That happens.

QUOTE
I'll bet I was guilty as many others that got sucked in by the guy in the above video who told us everything we wanted to know with the "Ted Kennedy wanted my 14 year old daughter" along with Kissinger's infamous "useless eater" phrase. Yep. Outrageous stuff indeed and it needed to shared immediately. He told us what we wanted to hear and we/I passed on his video.... blindly. Big mistake. It was later brought to my intention that the guy's website has all kinds of wierd alternative religion and UFO stuff inked to his site and as anyone knows in the "911 truth business", you don't lead with your weakest stuff when spreading the news. But yet, that is what this guy in this video has done. All that was missing was the "911 perps are shape-shifting lizards" stuff. Now for those here who don't know me well, I, like John Lear, believe there is a lot of evidence to indicate NPT is what transpired at the towers and no, I don't believe holograms were used because it wasn't necessary. Explosions took place in the tower basements causing bystanders to look DOWN at ground level just seconds PRIOR to the supposed impacts in a wonderful slight-of-hand. What an opportune time to create the plane impact gashes with thermite and pre-planted explosives while simultaneously showing fake videos on television. The official "plane impacts" story will now be readily accepted by most people.


Holograms were necessary to show airplanes crashing into the WTC. Holograms have technology that can project, in thin air, images with movement, sound, heat and light. Hollywood has this technology for over 10 years but has not released it yet. TV's in the next couple of years will have no screen. the image will be projected anywhere in your room. You will have a hand held controller that can make the image bigger, smaller and can place it on a table or an empty space in the room. The image will be bright and indistinguishable from the real thing.

QUOTE
I also disagree with Lear's hologram theory. Holograms are an unecessary tool in my scenario and in fact they would only alert bystanders to something fishy if they saw a 'plane' but heard no engine roar.


As I mentioned before holograms have heat, light, movement and sound and can be projected into thin air. It does not need a screen or special background material.

QUOTE
In fact, while typing this, I just produced a mutually exclusive, either/or situation with the "hologram theory" vs. the "impact video theory", that is, they both cannot be "true". The impact videos show loud engine roars, yet we have a hologram theory too. One of these items are false - or - they are BOTH false. My bet is on the latter, as in the old "Coke vs. Pepsi" routine where in reality the same people probably own BOTH companies and carry on the facade to steer business away from the competition. Same for "Democrats" vs "Republicans". But I digress.


I have not heard of the impact video theory. Will look it up.

QUOTE
My problem with UFO's is that the only people to have "captured" one is the MILITARY. Got that? For all of the supposed sightings around the world the only crash occurred next to a MILITARY base. Just lucky I guess. And no, I don't consider the 1947 Roswell a "civilian" capture for many reasons not the least of which it was that in occurred in the back yard of an AIR FORCE BASE.


They don't necessarily crash near military bases. They have special teams that erect panels to hide the saucer until it an be flown out by helicopter or if too big put on sometimes 3 lo-boys that drive through the night in formation to the nearest 'safe facility, or in the case of the Garrison crash are too big to do anything with it except bury it. The one that crashed near Garrison, Utah in 1953 is still buried there. They built 3 small buildings and called it the "Desert Research Facility". The buildings and the craft are still there.

Posted by: johnlear May 20 2010, 04:16 AM

QUOTE
And we also know that Prescott Bush and his Wall Street NWO banking buddies helped build Hitler's military machine. And what did Hitler's military try and build in secret locations? "Flying saucers". Yet, this was BEFORE the 1947 Roswell crash! How could Hitler and the Nazi SS have possibly known what was to occur in Roswell 2 or 3 years later, AFTER the war ended? Unless, of course, Hitler was following the NWO's marching orders, a premise that seems bolstered by the Bush/Wall Street/Hitler connection. Then we have the fact that, the CFR worked with Princeton and CBS to air the 1938 "War Of The Worlds" radio brodcast in which the entire populatiuon was hoaxed into believing we were being INVADED BY MARTIANS. This was 9 YEARS before Roswell. Are we seeing a pattern here yet? If not, I will spell it out for you. This is known as PREDICTIVE PROGRAMMING. This is what is EXACTLY what is happeneing with the "terrorist alerts" and "flu warnings". The Pentagon has worked with the media and Hollywood for decades to facilitate the scaremongering. In fact, the NWO MILITARY has been hoaxing us into believeing there are otherwordly monsters out in the wild blue yonder for over 50 YEARS.


Possible however we recovered 1 UFO from England that was not NAZI built, in the late 30's.

QUOTE
On the technical aspect of aliens and UFOs, the supposed beings and craft would be subject to the same Van Allen radiation belt danger that the Apollo mission hoaxters would have experienced had they actually gone to the moon.


Actual alien saucers would be invulnerable considering that it was them who placed the Van Allen belt in the first place to keep us with in 450 miles of earth to prevent us from going anywhere. Kind of like a playpen but considerably more advanced.

QUOTE
Do we even need to mention that there are all kinds of radiation producing bodies in the universe that space travelers would have to avoid?


Radiation does not produce bodies but radiation bodies are easily detected and avoided.

QUOTE
Then there is the question of how long it would take for an alien craft to get here. If it were traveling at such a high rate of speed, faster than the speed of light as suggested by some, for millions if not BILLIIONS of miles, how does it dodge a softball-sized piece of space flotsam that would otherwise "rip a new one" in the side of the ship thus aborting the mission?


Because the way they travel is to focus and amplify the Gravity A wave on a distance object. When the amplifiers are turned on it the amplifiers pull a portion of space to envelope the craft. When they turn off the amplifier they are hundreds of thousand of miles in milliseconds. The amplifiers can recycle every 12 milliseconds so they travel hundreds of light years in a very short time. They can't hit a softball piece of space flotsom because the piece is not in the piece that they united or fuse with.

QUOTE
And what about the G-Forces these "aliens" would have to contend with when passing heavenly bodies at light speed or whatever speed necessary to traverse BILLIONS OF MILES and yet do so during their lifetime so that they won't die of old age before their destination is reached?


Saucers produce their own gravity, you don't feel a thing while inside. Billions of miles would be a very short trip with this technology.

Posted by: johnlear May 20 2010, 04:23 AM

QUOTE
I could go on and on and on.... What I am getting at is that more than likely, not only is the universe much bigger than we could possibly imagine, it is likely so vast that it neither ever "began" and nor will it ever likely "end". It may morph, distort, expand and realign but it will NEVER dissapear, because, what is infinite just "is". And the likelyhood that an such an advanced civilization exists at EXACTLY the the same time, over the course of BILLIONS OF YEARS, no, make that INFINITY, has found us when we have not yet wiped each other off the face of the planet, is IMHO, a big fat ZERO. In effect, for all practical and relative purposes, we are ALONE.


Yes, there are good aliens and bad aliens but there so many nobody is going to wipe out anybody.

QUOTE
Yes, other civilizations may have existed somewhere in the universe, and probably some will exist some time in the future, but the likelyhood that if such a civilization exists presently, with the necessary technology, close enough, and has found us during our short blip on the radar, is virtually nil.


They didn't find us. They created us.

QUOTE
So, what's my point in all this and what does this have to do with John Lear?


The concerns that what I talk about and my beliefs may interfere with my efforts to help expose the truth about 911.

QUOTE
My point is this; that given the age and size of the universe and the time we have existed on this planet, we earthlings are but a flea on a whale's a*s and the probability that in the short span of time that man has existed on this godforsaken planet he has been vistited upon by beings with technology that is capable of traveling at the speeds necessary to cross the universe and actually survive the trip without hitting anything while flying at light-speed, without burning up from heat or radiation and without dying of old age in the process (unless of couse they also perfected Hollywood movie-style "cryogenics") you can virtually rest assurred that any supposed UFOs that exist are indeed man-made; especially when considering the aformentioned MILITARY/CFR hoaxes. Oh, and did I mention the fake Apollo missions?


They made us, they monitor us and help us achieve maturity.

QUOTE
IMO, the UFO stuff is the "external force" that Henry Kissinger and Ronald Reagan referred to when they were talking about reasons for "people of the world to unite". Defending ourselves from UFOs is also a way to drain endless amounts of HUGE money from taxpayers because with UFOs, like Al CIAda, it is difficult to disprove what doesn't exist. Only your military knows for sure. Trust them. B)


The military would like to know more than they know. That is why disclosure will not happen for several decades. There is no point for disclosure. The military gets what they want, super advanced weapons technology in return for helping keep the secret.

QUOTE
Where does this leave John Lear? I don't know why Mr. Lear says what he does regarding "UFOs", but I CAN say with great conviction that any UFOs that exist are almost certainly made here on terra-firma.


Most of the UFO's seen by the public are made by us. The real alien ones are not interested in playing games by giving the public a view now and then. So if you changed your word from 'any' to 'most' you would be more correct.

Posted by: lunk May 20 2010, 07:59 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqN2hIsRsIY

...a picture paints a thousand words,
but the song sings a thousand pictures.

Posted by: Quest May 20 2010, 10:23 AM

John, what is your proof alien technology was used to help facilitate the destruction of the WTC towers?

Posted by: johnlear May 20 2010, 02:35 PM

QUOTE (Quest @ May 18 2010, 01:23 PM) *
John, what is your proof alien technology was used to help facilitate the destruction of the WTC towers?



I would prefer not to turn this thread into an "Do aliens exist or not" so let me change
the question to "What is you proof that super advanced weapons technology was used
to help facilitate the destruction of the WTC towers".

To understand why I believe this you need to go to http://www.drjudywood.com/. Its
the website of Dr. Judy Wood who had the most nformation. Her degrees and background make
her eminently qualified to comment on this issue.

When the judge of the New York District Court dismissed the suit initiated by Morgan Reynolds
and supported by my affidavit they did not dismiss Dr. Woods suit as there was just too much information and that suit is still ongoing.

Morgans suit was a Qui Tam Complaint against:

Defendants. :
SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORP.;
APPLIED RESEARCH ASSOCIATES, INC.;
NuSTATS; COMPUTER AIDED ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC.;
DATASOURCE, INC.; GEOSTAATS, INC.;
GILSANZ MURRAY STEFICEK LLP;
HUGHES ASSOCIATES, INC.; AJMAL ABBASI;
EDUARDO KAUSEL; DAVID PARKS;
DAVID SHARP; DANIELE VENEZANO;
JOSEF VAN DYCK; KASPAR WILLIAM;
ROLF JENSEN & ASSOCIATES, INC;
ROSENWASSER/GROSSMAN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, P.C.;
SIMPSON GUMPERTZ & :HEGER, INC.;
S. K. GHOSH ASSOCIATES, INC.;
SKIDMORE, OWINGS & MERRILL, LLP;
TENG & ASSOCIATES, INC.;
UNDERWRITERS LABORATORIES, INC.;
WISS, JANNEY, ELSTNER ASSOCIATES, INC.;

I would like to make it clear that Dr.Wood does not support that the weapon was
on an orbiting weapons platform. She just proves how the weapon worked.


I am the one that suggests the weapon was on an orbiting weapons platform.

Posted by: lunk May 20 2010, 08:38 PM

hmmm,
then this destructive beam technology leaves high levels of tritium,
liquefies and turns concrete to dust, and vaporizes steel,
in 30 foot, easily manageable, lengths?

Yet, can only rip paper into the air.

Posted by: johnlear May 20 2010, 08:43 PM

QUOTE (lunk @ May 18 2010, 11:38 PM) *
hmmm,
then this destructive beam technology leaves high levels of tritium,
liquefies and turns concrete to dust, and vaporizes steel,
in 30 foot, easily manageable, lengths?

Yet, can only rip paper into the air.


Those 30 ft. lengths were steel that didn't disintegrate and were cut
to fit on the truck.

The paper was not ripped, it was untouched as were the tires of most cars..

Car door handles seemed to disintegrate but no the metal around it.

The damage to the WTC matched exactly the Murrah building damage which
was probably just a test.

Still a little more tweaking needed. smile.gif

Posted by: elreb May 20 2010, 09:07 PM

John…you had said:

“ One of the problems in trying to understand this is that you are told by mainstream science that the universe is 17 billion years old. This is incorrect. The universe is infinite, a concept very hard to believe but nevertheless true”.

Apparently, somebody seems to agree with you.

“It has been calculated that the time required for a white dwarf to reach a black dwarf state to be longer than the currently stated age of the universe of 13.7 billion years. These 13.7 billion years do not include the length of time the mother star existed which could be another 13.7 billion years giving a life to death age of 28 billion years. This alone would lead us to the conclusion that our Universe has been miss-dated”.


“In reality and fact, planets do not have an end of time and will last for infinity which is also the age of our Universe…which is infinity”.


“These dead stars equal over 97% of the planets in our galaxy. The life and death of Stars are independent of one another eliminating the need of a “Big Bang”. Infinity has no beginning and it has no end. Time is man-made and only applies to the object being observed”.


http://&quot;%20&lt;a%20href=&quot;http://www.elreb.com/&quot;&quot;%20target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;http://www.elreb.com/&lt;/a&gt; http://www.elreb.com/

Posted by: nitatutt May 20 2010, 09:52 PM

aerohead:
Other life is out there, from nothing you get nothing,
energy cannot be created nor destroyed therefore the
source of the universe is eternal energy. God.
He can, and i believe he has, created other life. Why wouldnt he
when he created this ........


My belief also - I am drawn-pulled towards this belief - I see the Supreme Intelligence everywhere - even in the bad.

johnlear:
We go through hundred if not thousands of reincarnations trying to get our soul matured to the point that we can live our lives with integrity; and without envy, hate or greed and to express our love for our family members everyday. After we can do that automatically we are released to go play with the other adults in this universe.

I know many people that believe this, I lean against it, mainly because I don't want to do this again - despite having 3 wonderful sons, etc, etc. I (we) will find out when the time comes.

I should have realized 911 was a scam the first day. But I bought it hook, line and sinker

I realized it - and was yelling at work " This is a scam - where is our defense - where is NATO and the fighter pilots ?
(I used to work for them in the AF - so I know the protocol).
Then the 24/7 "news loop" and my mind started to atrophy.
Thankfully (although I knew I was living a lie) my oldest son revived my intellect - just in time

There were some parts of the WTC that had controlled demo. There is no doubt about that. But the main destruction came from a weapon on an orbiting platform. You should understand that the A&E knows nothing about any space based weapons involved in the equation.

I've always believed that unconventional - unknown weapons were used on 911. Holograms are not beyond belief, embarrassed to say so most of the time -
so much of our reality is an illusion - why would perfected hologram technology be beyond belief ? I'm "outing" myself, in this respect.

There are obviously 3 or 4 additional astronauts going and coming back that are not known by the public. The first shuttle accident was sabotage. One of the hold down clamps was rigged not to release. It eventually broke loose but was the cause of the accident. The second was obviously intentionally shot down.

I've always believed that the Columbia was sabotaged, and suspected there were other passengers, and that there were secret contingency options.

Most of the UFO's seen by the public are made by us. The real alien ones are not interested in playing games by giving the public a view now and then.

Makes sense, I can agree with that logic.

The damage to the WTC matched exactly the Murrah building damage which
was probably just a test.


I always suspected OKC was the precursor (conditioning) of "yet to come" - clearly a "dry run" for the real deal.

Time is man-made and only applies to the object being observed”.

Completely agree.

Mr Lear, a pleasure to read your post. Although at my point in time, I do not agree with all of your explanations, you have opened my mind towards looking outside of the box (s) we are confined to.

If you are proven correct on some / all of your beliefs - whatever - I sincerely respect your diligence and honesty.

Regards - nitatutt

Posted by: lunk May 20 2010, 10:00 PM

Hi John
What are your views on the crop-circle phenomena?

Posted by: johnlear May 21 2010, 12:38 PM

QUOTE (lunk @ May 19 2010, 01:00 AM) *
Hi John
What are your views on the crop-circle phenomena?



Beats the heck out of me.

There are only 2 possibilities:

Our weapons platforms playing games

or aliens playing games.

It certainly isn't Doug and Dave.

Posted by: pan May 21 2010, 02:55 PM

Mr. John Lear Sir,
Could you tell me how many World speed record do you hold? what jet did you fly on to break those records? Lastly how many different types of planes have you flown?

Posted by: johnlear May 21 2010, 05:18 PM

QUOTE (pan @ May 19 2010, 04:55 PM) *
Mr. John Lear Sir,
Could you tell me how many World speed record do you hold? what jet did you fly on to break those records? Lastly how many different types of planes have you flown?



17 world records all for speed one for speed around the world. I flew No. 100 Learjet N427LJ which was the first Learjet Model 24. Most have been broken by other Lear Jets or Gulfstreams as I set those records May 23-26, 1966.

About 140 different types of aircraft.

My favorite aircraft was the Lockheed F-104A Starfighter.

Posted by: pan May 22 2010, 05:55 AM

QUOTE (johnlear @ May 21 2010, 05:18 PM) *
17 world records all for speed one for speed around the world. I flew No. 100 Learjet N427LJ which was the first Learjet Model 24. Most have been broken by other Lear Jets or Gulfstreams as I set those records May 23-26, 1966.

About 140 different types of aircraft.

My favorite aircraft was the Lockheed F-104A Starfighter.


Thanks Mr. John Lear you are a LEGEND, and a HERO to all of us especially to our future Pilots, great posting Thanks. thumbsup.gif

Posted by: GroundPounder May 22 2010, 06:20 AM

QUOTE (johnlear @ May 19 2010, 07:18 PM) *
My favorite aircraft was the Lockheed F-104A Starfighter.


hi john,

gonna have to digest most of what you have posted, but thanks for sharing. as i recall the f-104 was dubbed 'the flying coffin'. not sure why, but could you elaborate as to why it was your favorite?

Posted by: Skeptik May 22 2010, 09:24 AM

QUOTE (GroundPounder @ May 22 2010, 11:20 AM) *
hi john,

gonna have to digest most of what you have posted, but thanks for sharing. as i recall the f-104 was dubbed 'the flying coffin'. not sure why, but could you elaborate as to why it was your favorite?



I agree with you, Groundpounder. I remember that the Starfighter was known as " der Witwenhersteller" (Widow maker) in the Luftwaffe, and the Canadian Airforce also had a similar name for it, having lost almost 50% of its Starfighters.

Posted by: johnlear May 22 2010, 01:45 PM

QUOTE (GroundPounder @ May 20 2010, 08:20 AM) *
hi john,

gonna have to digest most of what you have posted, but thanks for sharing. as i recall the f-104 was dubbed 'the flying coffin'. not sure why, but could you elaborate as to why it was your favorite?



Hello GroundPounder,

It was called the the flying coffin because so many pilots got killed in it. The Starfighter almost single handedly eliminated the German Air Force who lost over 200 out of 916.

I flew a Canadian 2 place version that was owned by Mark and Gretchen Sherman in Phoenix and was checked out by my long time friend Darryl Greenamyer former Lockheed SR-71 test pilot.

It was my favorite, only second to the Lockheed L-1011 because it was like flying a missile and was very quiet in the cockpit at M. 1.7. I have a video of one of the flights which I will put on my new web site, "The Real John Lear" which should be up and running in a couple of months.

Posted by: Sanders May 22 2010, 01:58 PM

QUOTE (johnlear @ May 26 2010, 12:45 PM) *
It was my favorite, only second to the Lockheed L-1011 because it was like flying a missile and was very quiet in the cockpit at M. 1.7...


Mach 1.7??? - The flying coffin??? ... wow. Pretty cool - though I think I'll pass on taking a pleasure-ride. blink.gif

Posted by: Quest May 22 2010, 06:22 PM

John, what is your proof of the existance of aliens? Have you seen them yourself? Do you have any photos? What about some quality close-up photos of supposed UFOs?

Posted by: elreb May 22 2010, 08:04 PM

What is John’s proof of the existence of aliens?

Have you seen your self lately?

John is correct in implying that Earth is a garden and that some of us were planted here.

I understand instinct and I understand Intelligence. I not sure if they go hand in hand.

The oldest countries on this planet never seem to evolve.

I can only wonder why?

Posted by: johnlear May 22 2010, 08:04 PM

QUOTE (Quest @ May 20 2010, 08:22 PM) *
John, what is your proof of the existance of aliens? Have you seen them yourself? Do you have any photos? What about some quality close-up photos of supposed UFOs?



Quest,

I have no proof aliens exist.

I have no pictures of them.

And I have no quality close up photos of them
except the Meiers photos and I don't want to go down
that road on this thread.

Thanks.

Posted by: johnlear May 22 2010, 08:58 PM

QUOTE (elreb @ May 20 2010, 10:04 PM) *
What is John’s proof of the existence of aliens?


None. No Pictures. no photos. No video. Nothing. Zilch.

QUOTE
Have you seen your self lately?


Yes, in the mirror this morning while I was shaving. What an ugly old man.

QUOTE
John is correct in implying that Earth is a garden and that some of us were planted here.


All of us were planted here.

QUOTE
I understand instinct and I understand Intelligence. I not sure if they go hand in hand.


No. Neither has anything to do with the other.

QUOTE
The oldest countries on this planet never seem to evolve.

I can only wonder why?


Me. too. Thats a good question.

Posted by: nitatutt May 22 2010, 09:11 PM

johnlear:
None. No Pictures. no photos. No video. Nothing. Zilch.


I saw a video - circa Mexico City - looked like the real deal (grey)

Could of been faked - but of all the videos I bothered to watch - I thought it was real.

Anyways - I have believed that there is other life in our and other universes since I was very young.

I don't need proof - and I can't provide any.

I called my 75+ year old Southern Baptist Grandma on this question when I was 5 or 6 years old.

Asked her logically - and she agreed - they probably do exist - but we both concluded that we don't know (can't prove).

I also called her on racism - she agreed - she didn't realize she was being wrong.

I was sure there was other life - somewhere- since I conceived the idea. How could anyone think otherwise ?

Finally - I don't want proof - might be too complicated - - - might not be - I don't need to know.

For now.

Posted by: elreb May 22 2010, 10:25 PM

John,

My first two questions were not directed at you and by the way you are not an ugly old man.

I will add a new chapter to my website to include aliens, as I had never much worried about them.

You and I have more in common than I thought. Oh gosh, one more book to write.

I find it easer to send people to a dedicated website on certain subjects than to take up space here.

I do agree that intelligence did not originate from this planet. My teacher has a lot of respect for you.

Elreb

Posted by: pan May 23 2010, 07:24 AM

Dear Quest,
I have not heard from you for a while and thanks for being here again. Can I ask, why you have not answer any of my questions yet? The questions that I had here was placed on another thread so I have included it here for your convenience and hope to get an answer from every one of them.

Read my questions at: http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=20026&st=20

Posted by: pan May 23 2010, 07:26 AM

Dear Mr. Lear,



I believe you to be very modest man.

Is it also true that you flew a P-38, back in 1947 in the Bendix Race? not only that but also you were the youngest pilot ever to fly in that race?

I believe that you also set a speed record when you did a stunt in the air show which you done to help the Navy relief and flood victims, yes?

Posted by: pan May 23 2010, 07:42 AM

One of Jupiter's Belts Has Disappeared.

After Jupiter spent three months behind the sun, the huge gaseous planet photographed on May 9, 2010, no longer has the SEB, which was ten times the surface
area of Earth. The SEB also disappeared in 1973 and 1990, but not after a Superior Conjunction behind the sun, which makes this May 2010 disappearance more dramatic.
Jupiter's belts are composed of ammonia ice, a little sulfur and phosphorus, but scientists do not know why the reddish belt disappears every three to fifteen years.
Are the belts deep layer material that rises to the surface? Does some process stop that convection? Or have higher altitude clouds covered over the SEB?
The Red Spot near the SEB (June 2009 image) still seems intact in other 2010 images, but why if its companion belt is gone? Image comparison
by Australian astronomer Anthony Wesley. Please click http://acquerra.com.au/astro/gallery/jupiter/index.live

Posted by: pan May 23 2010, 07:49 AM

A Young Pulsar's “Reaching Hand

Pulsar PSR B1509-58 appears to be young. Light from the supernova explosion that gave birth to it would have first reached Earth only 1,700 years ago.
The magnetized, 20 kilometer-diameter bright neutron star spins 7 times per second, a cosmic dynamo that powers a wind of charged particles. The energetic wind
creates the surrounding nebula's X-ray glow in this Chandra X-ray Observatory image. Low energy X-rays are in red, medium energies in green, and high
energies in blue - all resembling a reaching hand. The pulsar itself is in the white central region. PSR B1509-58 is about 17,000 light-years away in the southern
constellation Circinus. At that distance the Chandra image spans 100 light-years. Credit: P. Slane (Harvard-Smithsonian CfA) et al., CXC, NASA.


Posted by: johnlear May 23 2010, 02:11 PM

QUOTE (Trapster @ Aug 27 2009, 12:55 AM) *
Ok, I have stayed away from this because I thought things needed to cool down a bit.
My last words on the subject (truly)

The Pilot's for 9/11 Truth is a powerful organization. It is guaranteed to attract both positive and negative attention once some of its big research projects are completed. Projects involving solid mathematical analysis, data computation and principals of science. But, you can be sure that the first 'press' questions will be directed toward the subject of 'crazy UFO conspiracy theories'.

To Mr Lear, I did not mean to insult you or your contributions. I see from your response that you have a great sense of humor and took it lightly. You have presented a truly astonishing body of 'theory' on other sites. Perhaps there is much more to mankind that I know. Perhaps I am paranoid in a negative way. Given the gravity (slight pun) of the magnitude of the events of 9/11, I simply caution any professional group to be weary of any 'appearance' of 'crazy theories'. As we know, perception is reality.

Cheers John Lear, thanks for taking time here. Cheers Pilots for 9/11 Truth, keep up the good work.


Thanks Trapster for your comments. Several of my theories come from a book called, "Gravitational Force of The Sun" by Pari Spolter.

In her book, published in 1993, she proves Newtons Second Law is wrong and that none of Einsteins theories are correct. Although it would make it easier to have a college background in mathematics you can get through without it.

She proves that Newtons assumption that gravitation force is due to and is proportional to the quantity or density of matter. This proves that the currently accepted gravity of the moon being one sixth that of earth is incorrect and that using the Bullialdus/Newton Law of Inverse Square the moons gravity is actually about 70% that of earth making it fully capable of holding an atmosphere.

Mainstream science uses Newtons second law using quantity and density for the computation of gravity. It is totally incorrect as she proves in her book.

I consider her book "Gravitational Force of the Sun" the most important book of our time.

If she is correct and I believe she is it makes the orbital mechanics computations of the lunar lander sheer nonsense as there is no way the lunar lander could have deorbited from 60 miles above the moon, landed, took off and docked with 22,000 pounds of fuel in a gravity field of 70% that of earth's. And, of course all the implications that come with that.

Pari and I exchange emails regularly and she had to help me through some of the math. Pari is the 'true' Einstein of our time.

If you google Pari Spolter you will come upon the "Correas' true government disinformation artists. You will notice there are more scientists that support Pari than not. Also take a look at the notes on the book on amazon.com.

I forgot to mention that I wrote a 15 page essay on "Gravitational Force of the Sun" which can be found that thelivingmoon.com. I tried to condense the most essential parts of her theory into 15 pages. I am working on condensing it to 2 or 3 pages for those who just don't want to take the time to read.

Posted by: pan May 23 2010, 03:00 PM

QUOTE (johnlear @ May 23 2010, 01:11 PM) *
Thanks Trapster for your comments. Several of my theories come from a book called, "Gravitational Force of The Sun" by Pari Spolter.

In her book, published in 1993, she proves Newtons Second Law is wrong and that none of Einsteins theories are correct. Although it would make it easier to have a college background in mathematics you can get through without it.

She proves that Newtons assumption that gravitation force is due to and is proportional to the quantity or density of matter. This proves that the currently accepted gravity of the moon being one sixth that of earth is incorrect and that using the Bullialdus/Newton Law of Inverse Square the moons gravity is actually about 70% that of earth making it fully capable of holding an atmosphere.

Mainstream science uses Newtons second law using quantity and density for the computation of gravity. It is totally incorrect as she proves in her book.

I consider her book "Gravitational Force of the Sun" the most important book of our time.

If she is correct and I believe she is it makes the orbital mechanics computations of the lunar lander sheer nonsense as there is no way the lunar lander could have deorbited from 60 miles above the moon, landed, took off and docked with 22,000 pounds of fuel in a gravity field of 70% that of earth's. And, of course all the implications that come with that.

Pari and I exchange emails regularly and she had to help me through some of the math. Pari is the 'true' Einstein of our time.

If you google Pari Spolter you will come upon the "Correas' true government disinformation artists. You will notice there are more scientists that support Pari than not. Also take a look at the notes on the book on amazon.com.

I forgot to mention that I wrote a 15 page essay on "Gravitational Force of the Sun" which can be found that thelivingmoon.com. I tried to condense the most essential parts of her theory into 15 pages. I am working on condensing it to 2 or 3 pages for those who just don't want to take the time to read.


Mr. Lear Sir,

Thanks for your info I also like to add that Gravitational Force of the Sun hard cover book written by Pari Spolter can be found in Amazon, so I have included the link for anyone interested in buying this excellent book.

Read more: http://www.amazon.com/Gravitational-Force-Sun-Pari-Spolter/dp/0963810758

Posted by: GroundPounder May 23 2010, 03:15 PM

i don't know what aetherometry is. spolter's questioning of force defined two ways is interesting.

if f = m a && f = G M m/ r^2 then if they are the same:

a = G M /r^2 which looks to be dependent on one mass anyway.

proofs are funny things. i saw a proof of 1 = 0 once.

addenda: nice hat you are wearing at your site smile.gif

Posted by: GroundPounder May 23 2010, 05:34 PM

john, any thoughts on chemtrails and cold fusion?

Posted by: johnlear May 23 2010, 11:38 PM

QUOTE (GroundPounder @ May 21 2010, 07:34 PM) *
john, any thoughts on chemtrails and cold fusion?



I believe the chemtrails are putting a layer in the upper atmosphere that when HAARP is activated (there are 24 HAAPR installations world wide) anything that is between the chemtrail layer and the ionosphere becomes invisible. Any plane or rocket or any other material object.

What ‘they’ are trying to hide I don’t know.

Cold fusion is possible and anything like that the government would like to hide. ‘They’ don’t want people trying cold fusion experiments on their own or even talking about it. Knowledge is power and they want to have the power. ‘They’ don’t want us to know very much about anything.

When I say government I really don’t know who is in charge but it sure as heck not the President or Congress.

I suspect that his first day in office a couple of gentlemen have a chat with him and tell him exactly what he is going to do and not going to do. That is why there seems to be so many broken promises. For one thing, there are 38 levels of clearances above Top Secret. The president has like Top Secret Crypto 16 or 17 because there is no need for him to know what is really going on. He is just a figurehead. The intelligence community has never liked appointed or elected officials. For another it would take too long to clear them and there is no reason for them to know all that cool secret stuff.

If the president asks for a briefing on say, flying saucers, he is given the standard runaround and probably shown a few picture of Roswell and a few dead aliens and that’s it.

If the president asks for a tour of Groom Lake he is probably shown some bs project or given useless information.

I remember a few years ago some top senatorial aide with a whole bunch of clearances tried to check out Groom Lake to check out the Lazar story about S-4. When he got there it was snowing and he was told all aircraft were grounded. He got stuck with a tour of soviet jets.

Posted by: lunk May 24 2010, 01:55 AM

i don't think i've ever seen a UFO,
though, i'm not entirely sure.
Because of the sheer distance to the nearest star, and the vastness of the universe, i figured it was impossible, for the distance alone.
However, they have found life everywhere on, and in, the Earth,
as long as there is water.
And there is water throughout the universe,
so it is very likely that life exists everywhere,
in one form or another.
It is also very likely that there would be many different types of alien life forms, and if they could travel interstellar, and they could overcome the obstacle of great distances, then one may expect them to see them hanging out around stars.
Also, there is the factor of different rates of time, and relative size.
If an alien was the size of a molecule? How would we ever know?
A different spectrum outside visible light,
we couldn't see it.
What if it communicated above 20,000 hz or lower than 20hz?
We may never hear it.

There is so much that we don't know.
i've been researching the sun for a while.
NASA has recent pictures updating all the time.


Sometimes i see little lines in space around the sun,
they say they are cosmic rays hitting the camera.

i'm not so sure of that any more,
as these same lines show up in consecutive pictures
sometimes, moving slightly,
in a way, that cosmic rays don't.

Anyhow, i think there are other lifeforms throughout the universe,
Looking at the world as our garden is sort of nice,
from the point of view of being "planted" here and all,

i just don't like the implication of being harvested,
as a crop.

Posted by: Quest May 24 2010, 01:06 PM

Thanks for your patience, John. Please forgive my persistant grilling.

This was the point I wanted to make. You believe aliens exist. You believe because you have not yourself witnessed them. Just for the record, based on mathematical probability alone even I believe alieans exist, but nowhere near close enough to us to have either the means to detect us, or to travel to us within their/our lifetimes. For all practical purposes, we are alone. This is the point I have been trying to drive home. I only starting harping on this topic because I am always wary of anyone mentioning "aliens and UFOs", without PROOF, in 911 forums. Keep in mind, when refer to UFOs, I mean craft alledgedly flown by aliens, not humans, and IMO, there is not one iota of proof of aliens flying UFOs yet we have all kinds of proof of humans trying to build craft that look just like the alien craft they say exist.

http://www.erichufschmid.net/TFC/FlyingSaucers/FlyingSaucers.html


Lastly, what is your supposed knowledge of the supposed Nazi saucer? 1st hand testimony, second hand, what?

Posted by: elreb May 24 2010, 02:32 PM

I was just a kid at the time but I was with my father in Germany who was Master Sergeant stationed at Neubiberg Air Base in 1948. He thought at the time the UFO was one of those flying wings!

On October 29, 1948, newspapers throughout Europe reported this sighting near Munich:

"Five U. S. Air Force pilots observed a mysterious, silvery object similar in appearance to a so-called flying saucer hanging high over Neubiberg Air Base in Bavaria. The object disappeared at a terrific speed after having remained over the air base more than 30 minutes. A similar object had been seen days before by another group of American pilots."

http://www.project1947.com/fig/jtt.htm

Posted by: elreb May 24 2010, 04:08 PM

John,

I feel for “Pari Spolter” after reading the entire scienceforums.net war zone.

I have never liked “Experts” that believe and except every thing in mainstream education.

They are among the most closed minded sort.

It’s like me trying to explain the “No-Big Bang” theory…its all uphill.

Wasn’t it your Dad who said, “I wasn’t smart enough to known that it wouldn’t work”!

Posted by: johnlear May 24 2010, 08:43 PM

QUOTE (elreb @ May 22 2010, 06:08 PM) *
John,

I feel for “Pari Spolter” after reading the entire scienceforums.net war zone.

I have never liked “Experts” that believe and except every thing in mainstream education.

They are among the most closed minded sort.

It’s like me trying to explain the “No-Big Bang” theory…its all uphill.

Wasn’t it your Dad who said, “I wasn’t smart enough to known that it wouldn’t work”!



Yes, my Dad said that. I am very pleased you took the time to read the scienceforums.net war zone.

Posted by: Quest May 24 2010, 10:15 PM

QUOTE (elreb @ May 24 2010, 07:32 PM) *
I was just a kid at the time but I was with my father in Germany who was Master Sergeant stationed at Neubiberg Air Base in 1948. He thought at the time the UFO was one of those flying wings!

On October 29, 1948, newspapers throughout Europe reported this sighting near Munich:

"Five U. S. Air Force pilots observed a mysterious, silvery object similar in appearance to a so-called flying saucer hanging high over Neubiberg Air Base in Bavaria. The object disappeared at a terrific speed after having remained over the air base more than 30 minutes. A similar object had been seen days before by another group of American pilots."

http://www.project1947.com/fig/jtt.htm


Elereb, in my opinion, the mythbuilding around the Nazi's is what the NWO wants us to believe. I also believe the Nazi UFO claim is bogus, just as in the "War Of THeorlds" radio hoax. Check it out for yourself. Go to any Blockbuster video store and find that 50% of the movies contan references to Nazis. It's just another bogeyman the NWO wants you to believe and nothing more. Remember, Germany was attacked to kick off WW1. I believe that Hitler worked for the NWO, as did Stalin, Lenin, Marx and Trotsky. Hitler and the NWO duped the German people into following him in WW2 for the complete vilification of Germany and nationalism. That's what WW1 and WW2 were about. And if Hitler working for the NWO sounds like a strech, who built up Hitler? Prescott Bush and his Wall Street. ANd who because director of the CIA? George Bush. Need I say more?

Posted by: tam May 24 2010, 10:24 PM

QUOTE (johnlear @ May 19 2010, 07:05 PM) *
Hello Pan,

There are good aliens and bad aliens just like there are good earthlings and bad earthlings. The bad aliens gave us some real nasty offensive weapons one of which was the weapon that destroyed the WTC.

It used molecular disassociation to reduce matter to it barest component which is why there was only 1 story left instead of 13 stories as in a controlled demolition. All of the dust particles none of which was more than 80 microns in size was what molecular disassociation does to matter: steel, concrete etc. We have 36 offensive weapons orbiting platforms plus 2 Naval command posts about the same size as the ISS.

If you ever wondered why it takes the shuttle 3 days (instead of the Russians who make it there in 30 minutes including docking) to get to the ISS its because they are stopping at those platforms with food and supplies. And if your wondering why it takes the shuttle 2 days to get back which should only take 54 minutes to deorbit and land its because they are distributing more food and supplies that were brought up by the Russians a couple of days before the shuttle arrives at the ISS.

Its a real nice cozy arrangement they have there and is the reason that, unknown by the public there are currently about 5000 astronauts current and qualified which include the Army, Navy, Air Force, NASA and a few other secret teams. They all operate under US Space Command which was taken over by the Navy in, I think, 1992.

Cold war? There never was any such thing in reality. All the threats and hoopla was for public consumption. We have always been close allies to the Russians.

Posted by: tam May 24 2010, 10:29 PM

Very intresting, I'll salute.gif have to look up molecular disassociation..

Posted by: elreb May 24 2010, 10:36 PM

John,

This kind of reminds me of Kenneth A. Kitchen, the Professor of Egyptology at the University of Liverpool; going nose to nose with David M. Rohl, the British Egyptologist and former director of the Institute for the Study of Interdisciplinary Sciences, whom put forth several new theories revising the chronology of Ancient Egypt and Israel to form a new chronology.

The best part and the sad part is...that they were both wrong but at least Rohl knew something was wrong.

Step one is to realize and understand that if the parts don’t fit the puzzle then “something is wrong”.

It takes independent thinking to resolve such mysteries.

Heck, if someone offers you a free copy of their book or essay, please take it!

Step two is to have your own explanation and not a simple…I don’t agree with you.

Rob Balsamo, John Lear, and many others are not hiding their ID or opinion. I take my hat off to such free thinkers.

Edit: We don’t really wear hats in Maui, just board shorts but I will leave my shorts on.

Posted by: elreb May 24 2010, 11:52 PM

Quest

As far as I know, the Nazi were not much of a going concern in 1948.

Something, what ever it was…was going on because my Dad did not have much of an imagination. He knew nothing of “World Order”, never used the word Nazi, could not understand why a 442 needed fat tires and all he wanted was a steady job. We were at Oberphaffenhofen Airfield, Neubiberg Air Base, and Landsburg Air Base up until 1951, then back to Eglin AFB.

I could almost agree about fake “nationalism” but that should be a different thread.

cheers.gif

I had to spell check your post to understand what you were saying. I’m not drunk yet, but working on it!

Posted by: pan May 25 2010, 09:12 PM

QUOTE (Quest @ May 24 2010, 09:15 PM) *
Elereb, in my opinion, the mythbuilding around the Nazi's is what the NWO wants us to believe. I also believe the Nazi UFO claim is bogus, just as in the "War Of THeorlds" radio hoax. Check it out for yourself. Go to any Blockbuster video store and find that 50% of the movies contan references to Nazis. It's just another bogeyman the NWO wants you to believe and nothing more. Remember, Germany was attacked to kick off WW1. I believe that Hitler worked for the NWO, as did Stalin, Lenin, Marx and Trotsky. Hitler and the NWO duped the German people into following him in WW2 for the complete vilification of Germany and nationalism. That's what WW1 and WW2 were about. And if Hitler working for the NWO sounds like a strech, who built up Hitler? Prescott Bush and his Wall Street. ANd who because director of the CIA? George Bush. Need I say more?

The Blockbuster video are owned by Zionist the same ones that owned the media in the USA and the World. To use Blockbuster video as a reference is stupid. Is it not a fact also that Alex Jones is closely link to the Zionist? His supporters, His Wife, His business partnerst are all Zionist. Its this not true Quest? Lets see now,

Alex Jones has a Zionist wife named Kelly Rebeca Nichols, and he has three(3) children with her. 2.) He and his Zionist wife and children all qualify for Israeli citizenship under Israel’s “Law
of Return”. 3.) He has at least nineteen(19) Zionists sponsors and advertizers that financially support his radio show and websites. 4.) He has a Zionist lawyer named
Elizabeth M. Schurig who is also the lawyer for Holly Lev Bronfman, the sister of Edgar Bronfman, Jr. Thus there are only two degrees of separation between Alex Jones and the
Bronfman family, one of the most powerful Zionist families in the world. 5.) His flagship radio station, KLBJ AM, in Austin, Texas, is owned by Emmis
Communications, a media conglomerate based in Indianapolis, Indiana. The founder, president, CEO, and chairman of Emmis Communications is the dual Israeli citizen Zionist Jew Jeffrey
H. Smulyan. 6.) His radio show is broadcast on Sirius XM Radio. The chairman of Sirius XM Radio is the Zionist Eddy W. Hartenstein. The CEO of Sirius XM Radio is the Zionist Mel
Karmazin. The President of Sirius XM Radio is the Zionist Scott Greenstein. Of the six(6) executive officers of Sirius XM Radio, five(5) are Zionists . Need I say more?

Actualy by 1914 Zionist Rothschilds have control of the three European news agencies, Wolff (est. 1849) in Germany, Reuters (est. 1851) in England, and Havas (est. 1835) in France. Then the Zionist Rothschilds use Wolff to manipulate the German people into going to WAR. Why were this never reported in the media? Because the Zionist owned the media. A fact that Alex Jones has done his best to missinform the public by his idiotic claims that Arabs owned the Media
according to a Mr. Walter Langer claimed that not only was Hitler supported by the Zionist Rothschild's, but that Hitler was one of them.The Dolfuss documents supports this I suggest that this doccuments hold the facts regarding any issues of Hitlers and his links to the Zionist Rothchilds and not the, Blockbuster video which are owned by those very people that are so spreading Disinformation to the public such as Alex Jones and his Zionist media Empire.
Need I say more? One question QUEST, Yes, Are the anormalities found in the Moon, and Mars artificial or not?

Posted by: pan May 25 2010, 11:45 PM

QUOTE (elreb @ May 24 2010, 10:36 PM) *
John,

This kind of reminds me of Kenneth A. Kitchen, the Professor of Egyptology at the University of Liverpool; going nose to nose with David M. Rohl, the British Egyptologist and former director of the Institute for the Study of Interdisciplinary Sciences, whom put forth several new theories revising the chronology of Ancient Egypt and Israel to form a new chronology.

The best part and the sad part is...that they were both wrong but at least Rohl knew something was wrong.

Step one is to realize and understand that if the parts don’t fit the puzzle then “something is wrong”.

It takes independent thinking to resolve such mysteries.

Heck, if someone offers you a free copy of their book or essay, please take it!

Step two is to have your own explanation and not a simple…I don’t agree with you.

Rob Balsamo, John Lear, and many others are not hiding their ID or opinion. I take my hat off to such free thinkers.

Edit: We don’t really wear hats in Maui, just board shorts but I will leave my shorts on.


What do you mean? blahblah1.gif
You remind me of Abbott and Costello Who's on First? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfmvkO5x6Ng&feature=related What can you tell me about the SCA excavation project mate

Posted by: pan May 26 2010, 12:03 AM

Hubble Sees Pluto Changing Color, Ice Sheet Cover
Posted: February 4, 2010
SETH BORENSTEIN,
AP Science Writer

Edited by Pan

WASHINGTON—Spurned Pluto is changing its looks, donning more rouge in its complexion and altering its iceball surface here and there.

Color astronomers surprised.

Newly released Hubble Space Telescope photos show the distant one-time planet — demoted to "dwarf planet" status in 2006 — is changing color and its ice sheets are shifting.

The photos, released by NASA Thursday, paint a Pluto that is significantly redder than it had been for the past several decades. To the layman, it has a yellow-orange hue, but astronomers say it has about 20 percent more red than it used to have.

The pictures show icy frozen nitrogen on Pluto's surface growing and shrinking, brightening in the north and darkening in the south. Astronomers say Pluto's surface is changing more than the surfaces of other bodies in the solar system. That's unexpected because a season lasts 120 years in some regions of Pluto.

"It's a little bit of a surprise to see these changes happening so big and so fast," said astronomer Marc Buie of the Southwest Research Institute in Boulder, Colo. "This is unprecedented."

Read more: http://www.usnews.com/science/articles/2010/02/04/hubble-sees-pluto-changing-color-ice-sheet-cover.html

Posted by: pan May 26 2010, 04:27 AM

Why UFO buffs think Barack Obama is their best hope for the truth about ET.
By Daniel Fromson

Edited by Pan.

"It’s a hell of a challenge," says Stephen Bassett as he saws through his chicken Caesar salad at a restaurant in the Key Bridge Marriott in Arlington, Virginia. "But the reason we’ve made progress is because this isn’t just any issue." After logging thirteen discouraging years as a lobbyist in Washington, Bassett is finally feeling optimistic. Compared to Barack Obama, Bill Clinton was "utterly unacceptable," and there were "huge problems" with George W. Bush. "They did what was necessary to contain the issue," he says.

"They had to do that because it wasn’t a secret," he adds, leaning in, elbows on the table. "The ETs are all over the place. They’ve been flying around our skies for sixty-two years."

Read more: http://www.paradigmresearchgroup.org/X-Conference2010/X-Conference2010.htm

Posted by: pan May 26 2010, 05:52 AM

Mr John Lear has answered all your questions Quest do you have a paranoia disorder? There are hundreds of Pilots, Scientist that have confirmed seen those UFO plus a plethora of witnesses that have seen Aliens too not to mention those that have been abducted by Aliens, and human mutilations as well. If you don't want to accept their testimonies as fact that's your opinion you got the right to believe and to say what ever you bloody like. But to call them liars and to assume that Aliens and UFO are all to do with the New World Order its Idiotic, stupid, and its plain Disinformation from you. Hey mate I notice that the thread on the URL of those pictures are from a Mr. Eric Hufschmid correct? Would this be the same Eric Hufschmid that was involved with a Christopher Bollyn? The same Eric Hufschmid whose half-sister Kathryn is married to Rupert Murdoch’s Son? Last but not least, why did you used FAKE pictures? Can you Quest answer me this questions before you do anything else.

Read more: http://www.nicap.org/ufoe/ufoe49_50.htm
Read more: http://www.nicap.org/ufoe/ufoe33_38.htm
Read more: http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/planes/q0204b.shtml



Take a look and compare the picture below.

Quote:This Presentation by a 27 year veteran homicide detective should be given a ear. Butch Witkowski is a MUFON volunteer investigator. What he presented at the annual Pennsylvania Local MUFON conference on human bodies found mutilated like the cattle may shock you, but it deserves a listen.End of Quote
UFOs And Human Mutilations Graphic Discriptions. Part 1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LIJisXtJIU&feature=player_embedded#!
UFO And Human Mutilations (graphic discriptions) Part 2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zj_hz7Dxecw&feature=player_embedded


QUOTE (Quest @ May 24 2010, 12:06 PM) *
Thanks for your patience, John. Please forgive my persistant grilling.

This was the point I wanted to make. You believe aliens exist. You believe because you have not yourself witnessed them. Just for the record, based on mathematical probability alone even I believe alieans exist, but nowhere near close enough to us to have either the means to detect us, or to travel to us within their/our lifetimes. For all practical purposes, we are alone. This is the point I have been trying to drive home. I only starting harping on this topic because I am always wary of anyone mentioning "aliens and UFOs", without PROOF, in 911 forums. Keep in mind, when refer to UFOs, I mean craft alledgedly flown by aliens, not humans, and IMO, there is not one iota of proof of aliens flying UFOs yet we have all kinds of proof of humans trying to build craft that look just like the alien craft they say exist.

http://www.erichufschmid.net/TFC/FlyingSaucers/FlyingSaucers.html


Lastly, what is your supposed knowledge of the supposed Nazi saucer? 1st hand testimony, second hand, what?

Posted by: elreb May 26 2010, 02:10 PM

Pan…whats on second,

Pari Spolter came up with a different conclusion than the mainstream “Experts” and got bulldozed by them. They didn’t even want to read the book.

Who shall give account to him that is ready to judge the quick and the dead!


Aliens are said to came from a planet in the “Dog Star” solar system whose Sun we call Sirius which is 8.6 ly from Earth and is the brightest Star in the sky. It is also used to date the past.

But in an attempt to set the stage correctly, it is critical that the reader be of a mindset and understanding that currently accepted dating of the past is “Out to Lunch” and therefore, if the reader is not of that wisdom then…it is waste of time to go any farther in the discussion.

Our time pyramid was built by a German historian named Eduard Meyer, a 1904 faculty member at the Friedrich-Wilhelm-Universität in Berlin. From his interpretation of Egyptian inscriptions he felt that the Egyptian clock was rooted around the heliacal rising of the “Dog Star” we call Sirius. This observation is said to take 1461 years and is called the Sothic cycle.

Meyer’s information on the alleged Sothic cycle largely depended on a Roman author named Censorinus who in 238 AD made claim of a New Years day in July of 139 AD. From this Meyer was able to deduce that by subtracting 139 from 1461 you got 1322 BC. And after final rendering, 1322 BC became the perceived end date of the rule of King Tutankhamen.

Meyer concluded that the Egyptian civil calendar was created in 4241 BC.

Needless to say, you would have to assume that the inscription even represents Sirius at all and that the Egyptians actually sat around for 1460 years to make these observations and one must also assume that Censorinus was correct and that Meyer understood him correctly.

Censorinus did not actually record a heliacal rising of Sothis in 139 AD but only said "The Egyptian Great Year ignores the moon”. The Greeks call it 'cynic', the Latins call it 'canicularis', because it starts at the rising of Sirius on the first day of the Egyptian month Thoth. (19th July) The Nile would flood between June and September due to mountain rains in the south.

What Meyer saw was the thorn = “Sept”, the Star = “tua” or Star of Dawn, and the cake= “T” the feminine determinative that connected to the land.
Judge for yourself if it fits the Dog Star Sirius = Sothis?

Sothis was identified with Isis in many Egyptian texts. Isis was claimed to be the mother of Horus, goddess of the “Overarching sky” and absorbed the character of Hathor. Perhaps Sothis is not Sirius.
If Jupiter was Amen then Sothis could be a planet.

Compare the above to the planet Venus which is often called both the morning star and the evening star, holds the symbol of femininity and is the brightest object in the Sky after the moon. Known as the goddess Ishtar (ISTAR), Inanna, Hathor, Aphrodite and was sometimes called Cytherea.

For all we know, Censorinus was talking about the 243 year transit of Venus as it passed between the Earth and the Sun or better yet, the Earth-Venus “Synodic cycle” where Venus overtakes the Earth every 584 days moving from the evening star to the star of the dawn. As the daughter of Anu, the sky god, Venus/Istar was depicted as an 8 pointed star.

Around the same time as Censorinus we find the scholar Theon, a teacher of astronomy and mathematics who lived in Alexandria, Egypt from 335 to 405 AD. Theon alluded that 1605 years elapsed between Menophres and the end of Augustus.

Theon’s Augustus would have been the famous Augustus Gaius Julius Caesar known as “Octavianus”; who ruled from 63 BC to 14 AD as the first emperor of the Roman Empire and after his death the people the Roman Empire worshipped Augustus as a god.

Exactly who was Menophres/Menophreos? One name that comes to mind is a fellow named Menophthah/ Menpehtyre who was more commonly known as Ramses I, a career soldier of non royal birth with a short reign of less than two years.

Another person who comes much closer is Men-nofir who was the Menes of Memphis. Sometimes he was referred to as Min the maker of gods and men, the same as Khem and Amen/Amun.

Feather= A, checker board = Min, water = N or A-min-N

Men-nefer, was the unifier of Egypt and founder of the First dynasty, and therefore the first king of all Egypt.

Augustus Caesar: shown at Aswan and wearing the Amun style crown.

Now logic would dictate that Theon when comparing the first emperor of the Roman Empire was comparing him to someone important like the first king of all Egypt & not some nobody piss-ant like Ramses I.
Now, if we do the math correctly; Augustus' rule ends in 14 AD therefore we subtract 14 years from 1605 years and you get 1591 BC and a more realistic beginning of the first dynasty of Egypt and not 4241 BC nor 3100 BC.

Another calculation has rendered this range from 1321 BC to 284 AD by comparing the end of the Era of Augustus to the start of the Era of Diocletian.

There may also be a relationship between the Minoan volcanic eruptions on the Island of Thera that has been carbon dated to 1600 BC. (Could king Minos of Crete be king Min of Memphis?)
If, in fact we agree that the first show down between the Persians and the Egyptians took place at the “Battle of Pelusium” in 525 BC then zero Sothic cycles took place.

Around the same time of Eduard Meyer, (1901) we find William Flinders Petrie. Known as the ”Father of Pots” he excavated graves in Naqada, Abydos, Amarna & Hu to methodically analyze jars and pottery found within them to form his relative dating. Although Petrie had no formal education he developed what is known today as sequence dating, a system of chronology based on close study of the stylistic and technical development which every object found on a site exhibited.

Although his methods were rough by today's standards, he realized at Naukratis the importance of accurate dating of objects and the strata they came from. From this he was able to date objects by correlation using the foundation layers by linking styles of pottery with time periods.

In Thebes, Petrie in 1896 discovered a stele of Merneptah. With the assistance of Wilhelm Spiegelberg they found writings that contained what they felt referenced to Israel. This so called “Israel Stele” was originally erected by Amenhotep III, but later inscribed by Merneptah the 13th son of Ramses II. Petrie then assigns a date of 1208 B.C. as provided by Eduard Meyer.

After a visit to Mycenae, he recognized Egyptian objects which belonged to the same period, i.e. the XVIII dynasty so magically Heinrich Schliemann and his successors in the Aegean would date their objects to compare with Akhenaten’s city of Akhetaten/Amarna to 1350 BC.

This was one of the first examples of cross dating, which should actually be called crap dating because it corrupts all other dating. Many Egyptologists who were contemporary with Meyer rejected his thesis because they found it violates of a number of synchronies, and is based upon too many ad hoc assumptions. Nevertheless, the Sothic cycle theory withstood its critics and remains today the basis for all conventional dating.

It will later be shown that King Tutankhamen actual end date was in the summer of 522 BC and not 1322 BC.

Oops…1322 – 522 = a whopping 800 year mistake. The real 18th dynasty should have a date range somewhere from
700 to 500 BC.

You have to recognize that this view is very controversial and will be rejected by most credible historians, scientists, archaeologists, and biblical scholars not because it is a stretch of the imagination, to be honest, no credible scholar could accept this view because they write & sell books full of misinformation pretending the whole time that it wasn’t grade “ D” horsesh*t.

Call it crony history and we are the suckers!

You can’t win arguments when dealing with people who are unwilling to use facts. Forget the magic dust.

Posted by: Quest May 26 2010, 04:12 PM

Question, where are the "alien" photos? Where are the UFO photos? Why the mystery? Am I suppossed to have faith they exist?

Posted by: Quest May 26 2010, 04:15 PM

Pan wrote,

QUOTE
Mr John Lear has answered all your questions Quest do you have a paranoia disorder? There are hundreds of Pilots, Scientist that have confirmed seen those UFO plus a plethora of witnesses that have seen Aliens too not to mention those that have been abducted by Aliens, and human mutilations as well. If you don't want to accept their testimonies as fact that's your opinion you got the right to believe and to say what ever you bloody like. But to call them liars and to assume that Aliens and UFO are all to do with the New World Order its Idiotic, stupid, and its plain Disinformation from you. Hey mate I notice that the thread on the URL of those pictures are from a Mr. Eric Hufschmid correct? Would this be the same Eric Hufschmid that was involved with a Christopher Bollyn? The same Eric Hufschmid whose half-sister Kathryn is married to Rupert Murdoch’s Son? Last but not least, why did you used [b]FAKE pictures


1. Why the name calling, Pan?

2. I called no one a liar.

Posted by: johnlear May 26 2010, 04:19 PM

[quote name='pan' date='May 24 2010, 07:52 AM' post='10786083']
Mr John Lear has answered all your questions Quest do you have a paranoia disorder? There are hundreds of Pilots, Scientist that have confirmed seen those UFO plus a plethora of witnesses that have seen Aliens too not to mention those that have been abducted by Aliens, and human mutilations as well. If you don't want to accept their testimonies as fact that's your opinion you got the right to believe and to say what ever you bloody like. But to call them liars and to assume that Aliens and UFO are all to do with the New World Order its Idiotic, stupid, and its plain Disinformation from you. Hey mate I notice that the thread on the URL of those pictures are from a Mr. Eric Hufschmid correct? Would this be the same Eric Hufschmid that was involved with a Christopher Bollyn? The same Eric Hufschmid whose half-sister Kathryn is married to Rupert Murdoch’s Son? Last but not least, why did you used FAKE pictures? Can you Quest answer me this questions before you do anything else.

Read more: http://www.nicap.org/ufoe/ufoe49_50.htm
Read more: http://www.nicap.org/ufoe/ufoe33_38.htm
Read more: http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/planes/q0204b.shtml



Take a look and compare the picture below.

[b]Quote:

Does anybody know why in the top photo the man in front is not casting a shadow.

And does anybody know how the F-86 could be keeping up with the M. 2.0 Douglass D-558 Skyrocket with its (F-86) speed brakes extended?

And does anybody know how the 2 lower photos could have the identical cloud formation?

Thanks.

Posted by: Quest May 26 2010, 10:41 PM

Jon Lear wrote/quoted;

QUOTE
Mr John Lear has answered all your questions Quest do you have a paranoia disorder? There are hundreds of Pilots, Scientist that have confirmed seen those UFO plus a plethora of witnesses that have seen Aliens too not to mention those that have been abducted by Aliens, and human mutilations as well. If you don't want to accept their testimonies as fact that's your opinion you got the right to believe and to say what ever you bloody like. But to call them liars and to assume that Aliens and UFO are all to do with the New World Order its Idiotic, stupid, and its plain Disinformation from you. Hey mate I notice that the thread on the URL of those pictures are from a Mr. Eric Hufschmid correct? Would this be the same Eric Hufschmid that was involved with a Christopher Bollyn? The same Eric Hufschmid whose half-sister Kathryn is married to Rupert Murdoch’s Son? Last but not least, why did you used FAKE pictures? Can you Quest answer me this questions before you do anything else.

Read more: http://www.nicap.org/ufoe/ufoe49_50.htm
Read more: http://www.nicap.org/ufoe/ufoe33_38.htm
Read more: http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/planes/q0204b.shtml


Take a look and compare the picture below.

[b]Quote:

Does anybody know why in the top photo the man in front is not casting a shadow.

And does anybody know how the F-86 could be keeping up with the M. 2.0 Douglass D-558 Skyrocket with its (F-86) speed brakes extended?

And does anybody know how the 2 lower photos could have the identical cloud formation?

Thanks.




Thanks John and Pan, fake photos - this is my exact point. Going on for a long time too. This is so relevant in so many ways, but I digress....

There are all kinds of supposed UFO claims by pilots and many, unverified stories attributed to pilots. Great. Problem here is that many pilots are from the military who are also known to obey orders no matter what, and, most of the stories attributed to pilots are not verified or corroborated with close up photos with details. In other words, a complete lack of evidence. We also know of military people that claim a large Boeing hit the Pentagon. rolleyes.gif And how do we know they, pilots, saw UFOs being flown by aliens as opposed to humans or craft built by humans or holograms, etc, etc? Knowing all this, we are supposed accept all UFO claims on faith? I am saying I want proof of UFOs and aliens. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. How about some debris I can actually look at and touch? How about a dead body and DNA?Better yet, how about a live alien? How about some photos? Why would the CFR and CBS hoax us in 1938 when they could simply conjure up an alien invasion since they were dropping in on us daily and "mutilating" our cattle?

War Of The Worlds Radio Hoax by Council Of Foreign Relations
http://www.hourofthetime.com/warofthe.htm
QUOTE
Hadley Cantril was born in Hyrum Utah, 16 of June 1906. He graduated Dartmouth College with a B. S. in psychology in 1928. He studied in Munich and Berlin (1929-1930). He received a Ph. D. in psychology from Harvard in 1931. In 1949 Cantril received a LL. D from Washington and Lee University. Cantril taught sociology at Dartmouth College (1931-32), and psychology at Harvard (1932-1935), and Columbia University (1935-36). In 1936 Cantril joined the Princeton psychology department. He remained a member of the department until his death in 1969. In 1950 Cantril authored a book called Tensions that Cause Wars (1950). Hadley Cantril was an active and influencial member of the Council On Foreign Relations.

The public believed the War Of The Worlds was real thus setting the stage for the implementation of an alien threat scenario... the only problem was that the state of the art of technology at that time did not allow for a believable presentation. The development of saucer shaped wingless and tailless flying machines by the Germans during WW-II solved the problem.

"In our obsession with antagonisms of the moment, we often forget how much unites all the members of humanity. Perhaps we need some outside, universal threat to make us realize this common bond. I occasionally think how quickly our differences would vanish if we were facing an alien threat from outside this world." - President Ronald Reagan, in a speech made to the 42nd General Assembly of the United Nations, Sept. 21, 1987



Again, where is the proof of aliens and UFOs? whistle.gif

Posted by: johnlear May 27 2010, 11:08 AM

QUOTE (Quest @ May 24 2010, 06:12 PM) *
Am I suppossed to have faith they exist?


Everybody gets to choose their own faith but if you really want to be 'with it' you should be worshiping Ashtar, the King of the Ashtar Space Command. He succeeds Buzz Cory who was the original leader of Space Patrol. Buzz Cory may have been before your time though. Carol and Happy were his crew. When Buzz retired Ashtar took over and renamed Space Patrol to Space Command. I am on the short list for taking over from Ashtar when he retires.

Posted by: Quest May 27 2010, 11:31 AM

QUOTE (johnlear @ May 27 2010, 03:08 PM) *
Everybody gets to choose their own faith but if you really want to be 'with it' you should be worshiping Ashtar, the King of the Ashtar Space Command. He succeeds Buzz Cory who was the original leader of Space Patrol. Buzz Cory may have been before your time though. Carol and Happy were his crew. When Buzz retired Ashtar took over and renamed Space Patrol to Space Command. I am on the short list for taking over from Ashtar when he retires.


No problems with "faiths" John - each to their own. But if people are going to claim something exists it must be backed up. That is the point I wanted to make. Nothing more.

Posted by: elreb May 27 2010, 12:21 PM

We have no problem believing that someday or sometime in the future we will have the ability to travel to other "Solar Systems" and "Planets".

Why then should we have a problem believing we have not already done this before in the past? Who is to say we are not the little "Green Men"? With the small except we are not little and we are not green and we also have woman!

The "Visible Universe" has over 100 billion galaxies containing over 2000 billion billion stars. This would mean you could have close to 500 million life zones. We tend to think in terms of water-based life. The life forms that we are familiar with are dependent on water. Water is made of small, plentiful atoms and water, often in the form of ice, is abundant in the universe.

It’s my contention that about 13,000 years ago "Sirius B", the Pup “supernovae” causing the end of our last Ice Age. Since it has a solar system, it would be the perfect place for “intelligent beings” to flee from.

8.6 ly is a drop in the bucket especially if you are using gravity as your engine to travel. One theory suggest that as you approach the speed of the electromagnetic spectrum, objects compress or shorten to the length of a point where time stops, thus distorting the time required to travel in space.

Since I believe in “catastrophic evolution” or change due to change, then “Intelligence” was brought to this planet from else where.

If this conjecture is correct then that would make some of us “Aliens” and the only proof you need.

Posted by: Quest May 27 2010, 01:08 PM

QUOTE (elreb @ May 27 2010, 05:21 PM) *
We have no problem believing that someday or sometime in the future we will have the ability to travel to other "Solar Systems" and "Planets".

Why then should we have a problem believing we have not already done this before in the past? Who is to say we are not the little "Green Men"? With the small except we are not little and we are not green and we also have woman!

The "Visible Universe" has over 100 billion galaxies containing over 2000 billion billion stars. This would mean you could have close to 500 million life zones. We tend to think in terms of water-based life. The life forms that we are familiar with are dependent on water. Water is made of small, plentiful atoms and water, often in the form of ice, is abundant in the universe.

It’s my contention that about 13,000 years ago "Sirius B", the Pup “supernovae” causing the end of our last Ice Age. Since it has a solar system, it would be the perfect place for “intelligent beings” to flee from.

8.6 ly is a drop in the bucket especially if you are using gravity as your engine to travel. One theory suggest that as you approach the speed of the electromagnetic spectrum, objects compress or shorten to the length of a point where time stops, thus distorting the time required to travel in space.

Since I believe in “catastrophic evolution” or change due to change, then “Intelligence” was brought to this planet from else where.

If this conjecture is correct then that would make some of us “Aliens” and the only proof you need.


Then you should be able to back up your claims quite easily, true? Let's see your proof of aliens and UFOs instead of conjecture and "ifs".

Posted by: Quest May 27 2010, 01:15 PM

Elreb says,

QUOTE
We have no problem believing that someday or sometime in the future we will have the ability to travel to other "Solar Systems" and "Planets".


We do? Who is "we"? Besides, if it is as easy and inevitable as you claim then why are other supposed intelligent races having such a difficult time finding us and why isn't there a UFO on my front lawn?

Posted by: Skeptik May 27 2010, 01:36 PM

QUOTE (johnlear @ May 26 2010, 08:19 PM) *
Does anybody know why in the top photo the man in front is not casting a shadow.


John,

The man in the front does have a shadow. You can't see it properly because of the position of the camera. You can actually just see part of the shadow to his right side. However,I agree that the picture is a fake. Whoever forged the photo was hopeless at dealing with shadows, as the shadow of the "saucer" is in the wrong position compared to the men standing front of it. The front of the shadow should be a lot further back than it is.


Agreed about the other fakes as well.
Regards,

Skeptik

Posted by: GroundPounder May 27 2010, 01:44 PM

as diverse as humans are, 'proof' will depend on the individual i'd guess. personally, i want the truth, whatever form 'it' takes. just the plain, unvarnished, unadulterated truth. facts help me glean the truth. and as they say, 'everyone is entitled to their own opinion, not their own facts'.

Posted by: Quest May 27 2010, 02:09 PM

QUOTE (GroundPounder @ May 27 2010, 05:44 PM) *
as diverse as humans are, 'proof' will depend on the individual i'd guess. personally, i want the truth, whatever form 'it' takes. just the plain, unvarnished, unadulterated truth. facts help me glean the truth. and as they say, 'everyone is entitled to their own opinion, not their own facts'.


Exactly.

Posted by: elreb May 27 2010, 02:30 PM

You can’t win arguments when dealing with people who are unwilling to use facts. Forget the magic dust.

1. Fact…I have never used the word UFO.

2. Fact…An Alien is anyone who is a non-citizen of the country they are in.

3. Fact…Considering “Mars” to be a planet, then we have already traveled to other planets.

4. Fact…Objects origination from outer Space impact & survive the Earth every day, even some originating from Mars.

5. Fact…The word “if” allows for accuracy. The meaning of a sentence may be rejected “if” it does not allow judgment. Examples: “If” I take a shower, I will get wet or “if” I stick my hand in a fire, I will get burnt.

Personally, I don’t make any assertions about today, in your face UFOs. I only forecast the odds of the possibilities that some folks were planted here, whether my design or by accident sometime in the past.

When the Europeans came to the Americas it was a catastrophe for the indigenous population but they came anyway.

Dad gum Indians should have taken pictures.

Posted by: Quest May 27 2010, 04:06 PM

QUOTE (elreb @ May 27 2010, 06:30 PM) *
You can’t win arguments when dealing with people who are unwilling to use facts. Forget the magic dust.

1. Fact…I have never used the word UFO.

2. Fact…An Alien is anyone who is a non-citizen of the country they are in.

3. Fact…Considering “Mars” to be a planet, then we have already traveled to other planets.

4. Fact…Objects origination from outer Space impact & survive the Earth every day, even some originating from Mars.

5. Fact…The word “if” allows for accuracy. The meaning of a sentence may be rejected “if” it does not allow judgment. Examples: “If” I take a shower, I will get wet or “if” I stick my hand in a fire, I will get burnt.

Personally, I don’t make any assertions about today, in your face UFOs. I only forecast the odds of the possibilities that some folks were planted here, whether my design or by accident sometime in the past.

When the Europeans came to the Americas it was a catastrophe for the indigenous population but they came anyway.

Dad gum Indians should have taken pictures.


1. Your point is?

2. It's never used to describe other-worldly beings?

3. Do you understand that it's a lot more difficult to put a live being on another planet than so a robot?

4. Really? Surviving after impacting earth? Define surviving, please. Also include photos/links.

5. I will be rich IF I hit the lottery. Until then, I am not rich. Your point is?

Posted by: pan May 27 2010, 04:30 PM

QUOTE (Quest @ May 26 2010, 03:15 PM) *
Pan wrote,


1. Why the name calling, Pan?

2. I called no one a liar.


1, Why did you used the FAKE PICTURES from Mr. Eric Hufschmid site?

2, Do you know who Mr. Eric Hufschmid is?

3, Would this be the same Eric Hufschmid that was involved with a Christopher Bollyn?

4, The same Eric Hufschmid whose half-sister Kathryn is married to Rupert Murdoch’s Son?

5, why did you used FAKE pictures?


Including questions that you did not answered Read more of my questions: http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=20026&st=20 whistle.gif

Posted by: elreb May 27 2010, 04:36 PM

The POINT IS?

Back in 1805 Louis & Clark ask Chief Ugg to prove he owns his horse and land.

Ugg not know what paper is, Ugg not know what writing is. Ugg am mighty hunter. Ugg smash enemies with Big Rocks.

It would be like Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, and Bill O’Reilly talking to Chris Mathews, Keith Obermann and Rachel Maddow…there is no point!

Posted by: GroundPounder May 27 2010, 06:48 PM

it seems to me that the whole ufo thing is getting a lot of play lately, for whatever reason.

i don't know mcelroy (politician, so automatically suspect) or the daily telegraph ( you aussie folks could gauge them better):

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/wacky/president-told-aliens-are-on-earth/story-e6frev20-1225870887598?from=public_rss

Posted by: elreb May 27 2010, 07:54 PM

Quest I changed my mind and will humor you. Sorry

1.Your point is?

Answer = If you don’t get “it”, you just don’t get “it”!

Bad things happen! Us go kill people now! Us show world who am Boss! It am only thing to do!


2.” It” is never used to describe other-worldly beings?

Answer = When the Europeans came to the Americas it (the arrival) was a catastrophe for the indigenous population but they (the Europeans) came anyway.

The coming in itself…is an “it” as boats, crafts and ships are “its".

3. Do you understand that it's a lot more difficult to put a live being on another planet than so a robot?

Answer = So you agree we never landed on the Moon and in a thousand years we never could?

"Us Earth beings am so stupid"!


4. Really? Surviving after impacting earth? Define surviving, please. Also include photos/links.

Answer = try Google images and type in Meteorites; after that type in humans but not Neanderthal.

5. I will be rich “IF” I hit the lottery. Until then, I am not rich. Your point is?

Answer = “You am backwards answers put speak”. Example = If I hit the lottery, I will be rich. I will remain that way until I am not. (The “if” comes first)

Posted by: Quest May 27 2010, 08:47 PM

QUOTE (GroundPounder @ May 27 2010, 11:48 PM) *
it seems to me that the whole ufo thing is getting a lot of play lately, for whatever reason.


My impression is that either the 911 perps are becoming increasingly aware that the sheeple are not as easily fooled as they once were so the need to pull off the one hoax they always wanted to do, the alien invasion of earth, replete with alien craft and beings, needs to be put on the front burner. The news, entertainment and propaganda regarding aliens and UFOs must be ramped up to protect the myth of alien-flown UFOs otherwise that tool, aliens as threat to world, will be removed as a rallying cry and reason for the "people of the world to unite" as stated by the NWO's Ronald Regan, Kissinger and others. Yes, the myth of aliens and alien flown-UFOs must be protected because it also silmultaneously serves as a convenient cover for top-secret projects.

FAKE ALIEN UFO ATTACK FALSE FLAG PLAN
http://www.vloggingtheapocalypse.com/viewVideo.php?video_id=551&title=FAKE_ALIEN_UFO_ATTACK_FALSE_FLAG_PLAN___IMPORTANT
QUOTE
The pending false flag operation by the New world Order crowd, is a real threat to us all. In 1974 Dr. Carol Rosin the 19th Disclosure Witness, was introduced to Dr Werner Von Braun, the father of rocketry and warned her about a fake alien invasion. There has been a UFO coverup for more then half a century. The CIA have been using disinfo in mainstream media as a shield for black opps such as the Aurora the pulse detonation engined plane.
A typical example of disinformation is the
FOX News UFO Mexican Air Force report. As long as we believe the black opp planes are UFOs, We will never uncover the truth about real UFOs.
Bush now has a Defense Strategy against UFOs & ETs because of the disinfo.
At the end of the video Ronald Reagan talks to the UN about an alien threat to mankind to bring all nations together.21st September 1987

Posted by: johnlear May 27 2010, 10:14 PM

QUOTE (elreb @ May 25 2010, 06:36 PM) *
It would be like Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, and Bill O’Reilly talking to Chris Mathews, Keith Obermann and Rachel Maddow…there is no point!




Yeah, like trying to have an intelligent conversation about UFO's and aliens with Quest.

" Me wantum scalp of alien first. "

Posted by: elreb May 27 2010, 10:32 PM

Ground Pounder,

Many of us are “Rip-Van-Winkle’s” types just sitting back drinking Rum & Coke on the beach until one day we get an email from Rob calling us to the attention of the John Lear or Wayne Anderson sort.

Nothing has changed and nothing is going on. The conversation is fabulous. Asking John Lear or Wayne Anderson about this or that is not an invitation to throw a pie in their face.

Folks can’t just disagree because they have a big thumb and a bigger nose to put it in.

“Nana-nana-boo-boo” is not the same as having your own website, records or books.

“Well I can’t accept your answer unless you reveal what type of Rum and was is really coke?

If you had the ability to travel thru time, I would demand pictures of the time machine, a full working set of “as built” blueprints, permits, EPA results plus your “Time machine” operators certification.

Obama, really, really was born on Oahu. (Really) But...but show me a picture of his birth.

Posted by: elreb May 27 2010, 11:24 PM

"Me wantum scalp of alien first”

John my exact thoughts…Zik..Zik…P’thhpp!

Voltron am king…

Ha…Ha…I actually also read some of the “Ashtar Space Command” data.

Interesting at best!

Most “Neanderthal” earth folks refuse to do their own homework.

B’aa’ab W’aada (just kidding) love Western land mass. Urthu bad people!

Well, don’t look at me, I’m just the messenger.

Posted by: Quest May 28 2010, 09:53 AM

QUOTE (johnlear @ May 28 2010, 03:14 AM) *
Yeah, like trying to have an intelligent conversation about UFO's and aliens with Quest.

" Me wantum scalp of alien first. "

Sorry, John and the rest, I don't mean to sound like a hard-ass. But, in light of the 911 scam, USS Liberty, OKC bombing, the global-warming, avian flu, swine flu, west nile virus, the war on terror, war on drugs, gulf of tonkin, Pearl Harbor, Enron, BCCI, JFK, RFK, MLK and the 1938 NWO/CFR Martian invasion hoax, you are going to have to provide hard evidence to back up claim of UFOs and aliens, something the vast majority of the world has never seen. BTW, I am in my mid-50's and I know of no one - ever - to having claimed of seeing a UFO or alien. Show me close-up photos of aliens and UFOs, a live alien, DNA, UFO wreckage I can touch and examine and you might make me a convert. In the meantime, I think my time might be just as well be spent chasing bigfoot.

Posted by: tnemelckram May 28 2010, 10:03 AM

Hi All!

Might as well toss my two cent's worth into this little hair pull.

I believe that there is lot of other intelligent life out there in the universe. The numbers are overwhelmingly in favor of it.

But we all got off from the same standing start (Big Bang or whatever). So it seems to me a real stretch to believe that any of the others developed so much faster than us and are able to do interstellar flight, which presents so many practical difficulties to us that appear impossible to overcome. IN addition, their life span would have to be much longer than ours simply because of the travel time that is still involved, even if you somehow figure out how to travel at light speed. There are very few stars within 100 light years of us and just about all of them are much farther away, so that shrinks the pool . It's really only practical if you have a thousands of year life span so a 100 year journey is a reasonably small part of your life span. Very few, perhaps none, of us would go on a journey that would take the rest of our lives.

I also can't figure out what would be so damned interesting about a species so far behind them that would make them want to keep coming back. The most likely reason would be that we are the only other intelligent life that they have found so far in their interstellar travels. But that suggests that they originate from one of the few nearby stars, which shrinks the pool of stars for such rapid development from billions to maybe a hundred, thereby destroying the entire premise of the Drake Equation..

I also raise an eyebrow when I consider how the beginning of the deluge of UFO sightings relates to other events. Goddard's rockets in the 1920's led to an explosion in the science fiction genre (such as Comic Books) in the 1930's. World War 2 introduced us to Nazi rockets that really worked and did something. Jet Planes appeared at the end of the War, and each of the winners claimed their share of Nazi scientists in 1946 and those governments put them to work to get men in space, with a realistic expectation of doing that within 15 years. Sure enough, with all those suggestive pieces in place, mass UFO sightings begin in 1947 (the guy in Washington or Oregon State?).

But I keep an open mind and read whatever I can find about UFO's including John's stuff. My head says there are no UFO's but my heart hopes they do exist.

SO I think I'm with Quest on this one.

Posted by: GroundPounder May 28 2010, 11:26 AM

while we are throwing our coins onto the table, i'll ante up. being in the 50's as well, i've been bs'ed for years. your list is not all inclusive quest smile.gif

nevertheless, my brother and mother saw a ufo one evening while we were camping on assateague (sp?) island md, ~40 years ago. my brother has passed on so i can't get the story from him and every time i broach the subject with my mom, the conversation wanders for whatever reason. i happened to be staring at the campfire and missed the event, even though they both said 'look'. it apparently came and went very quickly and silently.

as far as 'our' scientists go, i don't place a lot of stock in their theories either. reason and logic can get you so far, but then again...the mystics don't use those faculties.

nasa bothers me deeply for the whole moon landing hoax thing as well as their latest flyby of iapetus. having worked for a gov't contractor once upon a time, i've seen how the tiniest lie snowballs. after so many layers of bureacracy, the truth is nowhere to be found.

it would of course be a huge shame, if we could no longer differentiate the signal from the noise.

Posted by: johnlear May 28 2010, 12:09 PM

QUOTE (tnemelckram @ May 26 2010, 12:03 PM) *
Hi All!

Might as well toss my two cent's worth into this little hair pull.

But we all got off from the same standing start (Big Bang or whatever). So it seems to me a real stretch to believe that any of the others developed so much faster than us and are able to do interstellar flight, which presents so many practical difficulties to us that appear impossible to overcome. IN addition, their life span would have to be much longer than ours simply because of the travel time that is still involved, even if you somehow figure out how to travel at light speed. There are very few stars within 100 light years of us and just about all of them are much farther away, so that shrinks the pool . It's really only practical if you have a thousands of year life span so a 100 year journey is a reasonably small part of your life span. Very few, perhaps none, of us would go on a journey that would take the rest of our lives.



tnemelckram, thanks for your input.

But using the speed of light as a limit to transportation has been proven wrong many times and Einstein (that old fraud) was wrong in just about everything else he said. His only Nobel prize was actually won by the work of his wife but she was more interested in money than fame. So she agreed to let Einstein take the credit if she could have the money. This was in 1921.

I like what Harald Nordenson had to say about Einsteins Theory of Relativity:

Nordenson, in his book "Relativity, Time and Reality: A critical investigation of the Einstein Theory of Relativity from a logical point of view":

"I have often met persons, especially outside Sweden, who have expressed their astonishment that Einstein was not awarded the Nobel Prize for his Theory of Relativity, which many people consider as one of the outstanding achievements of this century. As a member of the Swedish Academy of Science which distributes the Nobel Prizes of physics I am on the other hand very glad that this was not done, since the Theory of Relativity is not physics but philosophy and in my opinion poor philosophy."

Just for starters three examples of objects exceeding the speed of light many fold are:

(1) Cerenkov radiation
(2) antimesons
(3) superluminals

The facts are: aliens that can travel hundreds the times of the speed of light and are infinitely ahead of us in technology.

Einsteins theory of Relativity both general and special are based on these four postulates which are:

(1) The Principle of Equivalence,

(2) The Gravitation Red Shift,

(3) The Gravitational Bending of Light, and

(4) Perihelion Rotation (Mercury).

Each of which can easily be proven wrong.

While travel hundreds the times of the speed of light doesn't in itself prove there are aliens it would be more scientific to take that erroneous argument off of the table.

Posted by: Quest May 28 2010, 02:14 PM

QUOTE (johnlear @ May 28 2010, 04:09 PM) *
The facts are: aliens that can travel hundreds the times of the speed of light and are infinitely ahead of us in technology.


Facts? Don't you need hard evidence and rigorous analysis to establish something as fact?

1.Which aliens? What galaxy are they from?

2. Where are the detailed photos/videos of said aliens flying their ships?

Posted by: johnlear May 28 2010, 03:25 PM

QUOTE (Quest @ May 26 2010, 04:14 PM) *
Facts? Don't you need hard evidence and rigorous analysis to establish something as fact?


Yes, this is why I suggested you read "Gravitational Force of the Sun" by Pari Spolter. She uses hard evidence and rigorous analysis to prove her point that there is no basis for Newton's assumption that gravitational force is due to and is proportional to the quantity or density of matter.

QUOTE
1.Which aliens? What galaxy are they from?


You will have to use your own sources to find the answer to this question. I could tell you but then you'd ask me to prove it and I'd have to borrow a flying saucer and an alien to drive it and they are all tied for for Memorial day weekend.

QUOTE
2. Where are the detailed photos/videos of said aliens flying their ships?


Neither film nor video will work inside of a flying saucer. Sorry. Now regarding Terry Rivera
who photographed the inside the one (outside diameter about 30 feet) in the underground hangar near 29 Palms, I don't know what kind of film or camera he used or how they got it to work. Both Adamski and Menger says their still photos did not come out.

In the case of Terry's photo's he says he climbed up a ladder about 12 feet to get to the hatch which was open (it was hinged at the top) he says that when he reached in to put his camera in before climbing in himself the inside was as big as a football stadium although appearing to be about 30 feet in diamater looking from the outside where it hung in a net. Chew on that for a minute or so.

Happy Memorial Day weekend. smile.gif

Posted by: Quest May 28 2010, 04:07 PM

QUOTE (johnlear @ May 28 2010, 08:25 PM) *
Yes, this is why I suggested you read "Gravitational Force of the Sun" by Pari Spolter. She uses hard evidence and rigorous analysis to prove her point that there is no basis for Newton's assumption that gravitational force is due to and is proportional to the quantity or density of matter.



You will have to use your own sources to find the answer to this question. I could tell you but then you'd ask me to prove it and I'd have to borrow a flying saucer and an alien to drive it and they are all tied for for Memorial day weekend.



Neither film nor video will work inside of a flying saucer. Sorry. Now regarding Terry Rivera
who photographed the inside the one (outside diameter about 30 feet) in the underground hangar near 29 Palms, I don't know what kind of film or camera he used or how they got it to work. Both Adamski and Menger says their still photos did not come out.

In the case of Terry's photo's he says he climbed up a ladder about 12 feet to get to the hatch which was open (it was hinged at the top) he says that when he reached in to put his camera in before climbing in himself the inside was as big as a football stadium although appearing to be about 30 feet in diamater looking from the outside where it hung in a net. Chew on that for a minute or so.

Happy Memorial Day weekend. smile.gif



John, the "evidence" you provide is no more different than many use to prove the existance of god. Somebody said god exists sprinkeled with a generous dash of 'faith'. This does not cut it in the scientific community, especially when considering the topic of UFOs where the supposed evidence and the witnesses are typically under control of the government and military, you know, the same NWO government and military that brought us 911, the moon landing hoax and 1938 Martin invasion hoax. If that is as good as your evidence gets, well, good luck with that.

Have a good weekend. salute.gif

Posted by: lunk May 28 2010, 06:17 PM

if we were all yeast,
and someone was trying to ferment a beer...
that could take a while.

i think we are much greater than a yeast,
but we sure are all, kept in the dark.

...perhaps that makes for a better brew.

certainly seems to be something brewing,

we're kept in the dark, by the lies we are fed,
and it sometimes seems that the only thing we know,
is that some of those lies are false,
...or true.
ugh.

The official theory, when it comes to space-aliens,
seems to be that we haven't found them, yet.

The counter theory, as i have read it,
goes something like:
the universe has existed forever,
different kinds of space-aliens exist throughout,
with different kinds of advanced technologies.
People were "made" to be a slave race,
to manage the planet,
and serve the creatures, that created them.

There are other counter theories too,
but usually of a more dogmatic religious basis.

i liken to the idea that the universe is infinite in all directions,
and that makes every living creature, the lone center of everything.

Posted by: pan May 28 2010, 06:52 PM

QUOTE (johnlear @ May 27 2010, 10:14 PM) *
Yeah, like trying to have an intelligent conversation about UFO's and aliens with Quest.

" Me wantum scalp of alien first. "


I believe you are correct Sir, Also he has an agenda against you I am sure, remember in one of my post I explain this. Also you notice he never answer any of my questions, he is like those politicians that never give you a straight answer plus he has use FAKE pictures from a source which I like to know why he did that but still nothing. Quest reminds me of the Ignorance lyrics,
Inside every cynical person, there is a disappointed idealist. blahblah1.gif

Posted by: elreb May 28 2010, 07:50 PM

John,

I have begun the process of buying a used copy of Pari Spolter’s book.

With gravity being proportional to acceleration and not mass will help me in resolving several issues in my “No big bang” Universe. If fact, Mass-free energy fits my Star to Planet model.

I’m only guessing that the force or the initial shock wave emitted by a “Supernova” is proportional to the acceleration of the forces emitted by the relative collapse or implosion of the former Star and not necessarily it’s Mass.

The heavy upper surface falling towards the gravitational center and lighter media fleeing the center being exhausted at as high velocity energy
Example: In the evolution of Yosemite Valley in California, water & ice erosion caused sections of the upper valley to fall toward the lower valley causing high wind forces large enough to literally “Blow down” every tree in sight.

So the question would be, is it the acceleration of the material or the weight of the material that has the greatest influence on the disruption or distortion?

elreb

Posted by: rob balsamo May 29 2010, 05:35 PM

All off topic posts split to here.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=20026

Please stay on topic.

Posted by: elreb May 29 2010, 06:43 PM

John,

Let us say I was to put three views on the table.

If you drop a bowling ball and a marble from the top of the Sears Tower, they would or would not hit the ground at the same time as only air resistance is the issue and not the weight.

If you were on the space station and pushed a bowling ball into space with your hand, at the same time you fired a marble from a gun, into space, the marble would or would not have the greater energy over the bowling ball.

If the bowling ball and the marble were both planets, and captured by a young Star would the marble hold more gravitational attraction over the more massive yet slower bowling ball.

Is it the speed of axial rotation or the orbital speed that has the most affect?

Posted by: tnemelckram May 29 2010, 07:07 PM

Hi Rob!

QUOTE
All off topic posts split to here. Please stay on topic.


Thanks for splitting off all that Alex Jones crap. As to that debate, I have no idea about what he might be, he could be anything, and really don't care to take the time to find out. All I know is Alex Jone's style is not my taste of play and one you get past his bluster there is really nothing of interest.

But what is interesting is this UFO stuff with John Lear. And I gotta go because I owe him a rebuttal to some points he made. Here I come Mr. Lear!

Posted by: tnemelckram May 29 2010, 08:34 PM

Hi Mr. Lear!

Thanks for your response, from which I see we have a lot of common interests, newly among them quantum physics for the small stuff and relativity for the big stuff. My interest is purely a popular or lay interest. I can't do the math and don't like it anyway but as a lawyer I ran reason it through. That's why I am probably partial to Einstein and his thought experiments because I can follow him and reason it through without math. The amazing thing is his paper on Special Relativity was all thought experiment and no math at all! But that only involved constant motion, so when he turned to accelerating motion (uh oh!! Trajectories! Calculus!) he subbed the math for General Relativity, one whom came up with the Ricci Tensor that balanced Einstein's equations.


QUOTE
. . . . (E)instein (that old fraud) was wrong in just about everything else he said.

Einsteins theory of Relativity both general and special are based on these four postulates which are:
(1) The Principle of Equivalence, (2) The Gravitation Red Shift, (3) The Gravitational Bending of Light, and (4) Perihelion Rotation (Mercury). Each of which can easily be proven wrong.


None of Einstein's work involved quantum mechanics. That body of science was developed in the 1920's after Einstein's Relativity work was done.. And you are right that Einstein didn't agree with a lot of it and fell behind the curve of developing knowledge. But just about all physicists agree that the Relativities are holding up rather well in the realm of the very large, which is where our UFO talk belongs, because all UFO reports are reports of big enough to see flying objects that presumably got here across the interstellar distances..

But the only thing that by consensus opinion contradicts the Relativities in the realm of the very small is the instantaneous transfer of effects from one particle to another which appears to happen even across across interstellar distances. Einstein called this "spooky action at a distance" and did not agree. But the quantum guys still don't say that Einstein is easily proven wrong, in fact, they say his stuff holds up in the realm of the large, but breaks down in this respect in the quantum realm of the small. Only a small minority argues for trashing the Relativities all together.


QUOTE
But using the speed of light as a limit to transportation has been proven wrong many times . . . . .
. . . . . . .
Just for starters three examples of objects exceeding the speed of light many fold are: (1) Cerenkov radiation (2) antimesons (3) superluminals


These are all small, essentially mass less quantum particles. They all fit within the above discussion about instantaneous transmission of quantum effects across interstellar distances and are just three more of the many types of quantum particles about which that is true. But the UFO reports are all of objects which are large enough to contain humans and what we understand as propulsion systems, aerodynamic features and life support systems. That means that they are composed of a whole lot of quantum particles (just say zillions) joined together into structural substances, have great mass in quantum terms, and by definition have crossed the interstellar void. That means they are, by virtual consensus, subject to the Relativity world and cannot fit into the exceptions for single quantum particles such as the ones you list.

All the reports of UFOs fall into this trap by saying that they actually saw objects flying with large masses.

If the objects were flying at a thousandth of light speed, let alone at or over it, they would not see them at all! and there would be nothing to report. You can say they fly slower to make observations or something but (1) why do that and reveal yourself when you don't have to; and (2) if they are indeed so advanced to do the faster than light travel surely they have instruments that can make observations at that speed as well. EDIT TO ADD (3) If that speed is normal and state of the art to them, why would they even want to slow down to a visible speed, let alone waste effort on adding obsolete technology just to have a dual speed craft? It would be like building a car with horse harness up front because surely you will want to do forsake the engine and have a horse pull you instead. 2d EDIT TO ADD: And then conveniently, switching from extra light speed power to horse power has the effect of (1) making their craft behave in a way that our science tells us flying objects behave; (2) enabling us to see them; and (3) report their behavior consistently with our science,.

And of course the objects have to have large mass to accommodate creatures like us and fly in accordance with our science. Just another example of the Anthropic Principal in action.

Posted by: pan May 30 2010, 06:03 AM

Hi elreb,

I like to ask you in regard to Egypt, if you are aware of any secret excavation being carried out? If so what can you tell me about them?

Posted by: elreb May 30 2010, 12:58 PM

They have been investigating the incident in September, where 6 people (Polish team from Warsaw University) died in mysterious circumstances, were buried alive in an illegal dig.

'Their research has revealed secret burial grounds and the possible location of Khufu's tomb. They have used ground penetrating radar to locate this as well as numerous locations of treasures hidden underground. Their interest in coming forward and releasing the film is to reveal the subterfuge, and encourage openness in regard to the discoveries being made out at the Plateau and around Egypt.

But their purpose there is much more complex. Go to their website, www.Gizamap.com and watch the presentation there, the intro and the one entitled "Earth Protection".

The information they are in the process of revealing may hold the key to preventing the pole shift and survival of humanity.

Posted by: johnlear May 30 2010, 04:42 PM

QUOTE (tnemelckram @ May 27 2010, 10:34 PM) *
Hi Mr. Lear!

Thanks for your response, from which I see we have a lot of common interests, newly among them quantum physics for the small stuff and relativity for the big stuff. My interest is purely a popular or lay interest. I can't do the math and don't like it anyway but as a lawyer I ran reason it through. That's why I am probably partial to Einstein and his thought experiments because I can follow him and reason it through without math. The amazing thing is his paper on Special Relativity was all thought experiment and no math at all! But that only involved constant motion, so when he turned to accelerating motion (uh oh!! Trajectories! Calculus!) he subbed the math for General Relativity, one whom came up with the Ricci Tensor that balanced Einstein's equations.




None of Einstein's work involved quantum mechanics. That body of science was developed in the 1920's after Einstein's Relativity work was done.. And you are right that Einstein didn't agree with a lot of it and fell behind the curve of developing knowledge. But just about all physicists agree that the Relativities are holding up rather well in the realm of the very large, which is where our UFO talk belongs, because all UFO reports are reports of big enough to see flying objects that presumably got here across the interstellar distances..

But the only thing that by consensus opinion contradicts the Relativities in the realm of the very small is the instantaneous transfer of effects from one particle to another which appears to happen even across across interstellar distances. Einstein called this "spooky action at a distance" and did not agree. But the quantum guys still don't say that Einstein is easily proven wrong, in fact, they say his stuff holds up in the realm of the large, but breaks down in this respect in the quantum realm of the small. Only a small minority argues for trashing the Relativities all together.




These are all small, essentially mass less quantum particles. They all fit within the above discussion about instantaneous transmission of quantum effects across interstellar distances and are just three more of the many types of quantum particles about which that is true. But the UFO reports are all of objects which are large enough to contain humans and what we understand as propulsion systems, aerodynamic features and life support systems. That means that they are composed of a whole lot of quantum particles (just say zillions) joined together into structural substances, have great mass in quantum terms, and by definition have crossed the interstellar void. That means they are, by virtual consensus, subject to the Relativity world and cannot fit into the exceptions for single quantum particles such as the ones you list.

All the reports of UFOs fall into this trap by saying that they actually saw objects flying with large masses.

If the objects were flying at a thousandth of light speed, let alone at or over it, they would not see them at all! and there would be nothing to report. You can say they fly slower to make observations or something but (1) why do that and reveal yourself when you don't have to; and (2) if they are indeed so advanced to do the faster than light travel surely they have instruments that can make observations at that speed as well. EDIT TO ADD (3) If that speed is normal and state of the art to them, why would they even want to slow down to a visible speed, let alone waste effort on adding obsolete technology just to have a dual speed craft? It would be like building a car with horse harness up front because surely you will want to do forsake the engine and have a horse pull you instead. 2d EDIT TO ADD: And then conveniently, switching from extra light speed power to horse power has the effect of (1) making their craft behave in a way that our science tells us flying objects behave; (2) enabling us to see them; and (3) report their behavior consistently with our science,.

And of course the objects have to have large mass to accommodate creatures like us and fly in accordance with our science. Just another example of the Anthropic Principal in action.


tnemelckram,

You are debating from the point of view of mainstream physics. If you want to catch up you need to read Pari Spolter's book "Gravitational Force of the Sun" where she debunks Einsteins theories both general and special and Newtons second law.

About the 'horse collar' thing I am not sure what it is you are trying to say.

As to your comment "in accordance to our science" you are assuming that 'our science is correct'. As I mentioned before mainstream science believes that gravitational force is due to and proportional to the quantity and density of matter. Pari proves mathematically and scientifically that this is wrong.

Let's continue this debate after you have read Pari Spolter's book. That way you can say "Pari is wrong about this or that and this is why". This will level the playing field. If you don't want to read the book then the scienceforum.com might be a better place for your comments. They do not question mainstream physics and I think they are the forum that still believes that the Apollo Missions went to the moon. Anybody who still believes that fairy tale is simply not conversant with the known facts.

Posted by: tnemelckram May 30 2010, 08:58 PM

Hi Mr. l:ear!

You are right that I am basing what I say on conventional physics. But I will look up Pari Spotler and try to get a grip on what he/she says, even though I probably won't go as far as to buy the book and read it. But i do want to respond to one thing.

QUOTE
As to your comment "in accordance to our science" you are assuming that 'our science is correct'.


I am not assuming our science is correct. All I am saying is that all of the reports of the observations of UFOs have them behaving "in accordance with or science". Whereas you say it is correct to assume that they would not behave in accordance with our science because as you say it may be erroneous to assume our science is correct. But why do the observers then report in their actual observations, which would be the strongest evidence that UFOs built and piloted by intelligent aliens exist, that the UFO's behaved "in accordance with our science" as they observed them?

I say that if our science is incorrect and the UFOs are using some different science, then their craft would not appear to behave in accordance with human science to human observers. What they report is consistent with the Anthropic Principle, which assumes that any phenomenon must have attributes consistent with the rules of science that we believe are required for us to exist. But if the aliens use and exist under different rules of science, that would not be the case.

Posted by: elreb May 30 2010, 09:41 PM

Tnemelckram,

You are a very lucky person.

I agree with both John Lear and Pari Spotler (who just happens to be a woman) and I have ordered her book that I will read.

Mainstream wisdom is “Out to Lunch”. In fact, mainstream education is “Out to Lunch”.

John had once stated that most (if not all) UFO’s are man made and real Aliens are in plain sight.

Now where you are lucky is in respect that John will answer your apparent questions, yet avoid mine!

Seems odd to me!

Nan nu… nan new…Amigo.

elreb

Posted by: lunk May 31 2010, 10:05 AM

Hi again John,
i've been looking into, what gravity is, for a little while now.

It seems, from my own research, that gravity is gradation of time.
as one descends into gravity, the duration of time is relaxed.
Satellites in orbit have to recalibrate their clocks to the ones on Earth,
as the passage of time is different, at different elevations.
This phenomenon also causes an increase in the density of material by a factor of 4,
going toward a center of gravity.

This would mean that the moon is much closer to the Earth's weight,
than as it is presently measured.

Does this fit at all, with your knowledge and experiences of altitude and gravity?

Posted by: johnlear May 31 2010, 03:14 PM

QUOTE (lunk @ May 29 2010, 12:05 PM) *
Hi again John,
i've been looking into, what gravity is, for a little while now.

It seems, from my own research, that gravity is gradation of time.
as one descends into gravity, the duration of time is relaxed.
Satellites in orbit have to recalibrate their clocks to the ones on Earth,
as the passage of time is different, at different elevations.
This phenomenon also causes an increase in the density of material by a factor of 4,
going toward a center of gravity.

This would mean that the moon is much closer to the Earth's weight,
than as it is presently measured.

Does this fit at all, with your knowledge and experiences of altitude and gravity?



Lunk,

Yes that experiment with the clock in space is correct.

We know that gravity is not proportional to the quantity or density of matter. So you
need to forget about size and density as any relation to gravity.

Current I use the Bullialdus/Newton equation for the law of inverse square for which you
need the size of an object in orbit, its distance and neutral point between the 2 objects.
Using this formula the gravity of the moon works out to be 70% of earths gravity.

Mainstream science, when asked about using the Law of Inverse square to determine the
gravity of the moon say "Oh, that's a 3 body problem (including the sun) so its far to complicated
to work out. However, Pari, a mathematical genius took on the problem and determined that
including the sun into the equation that the moons gravity works out to be 70% of earths; the same
as working the problem with the Law of Inverse Square.

If we had the the exact figures of an object orbiting the moon we could use Pari's formula which
she states in her book we could further refine the gravity of the moon but anything from NASA is suspect. And the gravity figures from Apollo 15 are bogus simply because no Apollo spacecraft ever went to or orbited the moon.

Its NASA's job to convince us that the gravity of the moon is one sixth that of earth and therefore could not hold onto an atmosphere. The facts are that the moon does have an atmosphere although slightly less than earth's. Standing on the moon is like standing at 18,000 feet here on earth.

So what causes gravity? I don't know. Neither does Pari.

Kepler thought it was magnetism.

Posted by: elreb May 31 2010, 11:19 PM

nonono.gif As the Sharks swims into the trap!

Quantum reality

The following does not represent "elreb" view but it’s a good start. (I will spin it later)

In Quantum Reality modern people do not have a single picture of "the way the world really is;" instead there are eight ideas of "quantum reality."

These eight views of reality are quite different; yet all are considered by leading scientists to be valid, or a least successful in terms of explaining
experiments.

Worldviews of “Folks”:

There is no deep reality.

Reality is created by observation.

Reality is an undivided wholeness.

Reality consists of a steadily increasing number of parallel universes.

The world obeys a non-human kind of reasoning.

The world is made of ordinary objects.

Consciousness creates reality.

The world is twofold, consisting of potentials and actualities.

Scientists will admit that quantum theories do not correspond to "common sense"---meaning, the law of cause and effect. The principal features of quantum theory contradict "cause and effect" relationships by assuming that random, spontaneous events can and do occur within a quantified limit (specified by the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle).


The majority of leading modern physicists seriously believe the first view; "There is no deep reality" and claim that there is no objective reality. For them, "physics is not physical, but metaphysical."

Stay tuned, Next the Spinning Charged Ring…

Posted by: lunk Jun 1 2010, 10:06 AM

QUOTE (johnlear @ May 31 2010, 12:14 PM) *
Lunk,



So what causes gravity? I don't know. Neither does Pari.

Kepler thought it was magnetism.


http://www.cr-theory.org/default.aspx#intro

A very interesting and intuitive,
theory,
and very plausible, explanation of gravity.

...i think Jerry Reynard is on to sum things.

He realized his theory was so contrary to modern science,
he called it the comedy-recycling theory.
(and that is very clever!)

i don't think many know of it, yet.

(edit) spellin'

Posted by: Tamborine man Jun 1 2010, 03:54 PM

johnlear:
"So what causes gravity? I don't know. Neither does Pari.

Kepler thought it was magnetism."


'gravity' is inescapably connected to the laws of mutual attraction
cohesion and adhesion, together with the laws applying to the
centrifugal and centripetal forces.

The mutual balance between the forces of cohesion and adhesion
always stay at zero, and the same applies to the mutual balance
between the centrifugal and the centripetal forces that likewise
stay at zero.
But not only that: the mutual balance between these two pairs
also must stay at zero - for 'gravity' to come into effect.

Sadly, 'science' is not mature enough to take these forces into
consideration when 'dealing' with the problem of gravity, but that
should certainly not prevent us from doing so ....... should it!!

Cheers

Posted by: elreb Jun 1 2010, 08:20 PM

tnemelckram…I have several questions for you.

1. You said, “Why would they even want to slow down to a visible speed”?

Question: I thought that the “Speed of Light” APPLIED TO ALL “electromagnetic radiation” NOT just visible light. I understand that Gamma, X-ray and Ultra Violet radiation arrive first only because of their short wave lengths but do they actually travel faster? Eagles can see things we cannot see and dog hear sounds we cannot hear. I would not think the speed changed only the ability to detect things.

2. But we all got off from the same standing start (Big Bang or whatever).

Question: You actually believe that “we all” got off from the same start because I sure do not.

3. There are very few stars within 100 light years of us.

Question: Why 100 light years when the effective range only need to be 12 ly and the Dog Star solar system has proven it self to have everything you need for life and they are only 8.6 ly away.

Posted by: lunk Jun 2 2010, 09:45 AM

The speed of anything is completely dependent on time.
As time has been shown to vary,
a light year distance, may not be that far,
...if we could control gravity,
which may be the same thing,
as controlling time.

i think, to do this, we need to make an electro-gravitational singularity,
a, sort of, contained black-hole, that can be switched on or off.
This maybe achieved by magnetically compressing an electrically charged plasma down to a mathematical point.

perhaps the title of this thread
should be changed to
a conversation with John Lear.

John?

Posted by: elreb Jun 2 2010, 06:33 PM

Anyone ever heard this story? JOHN?

In December of 1984 the FAA and NASA flew a four engine Boeing 720/707 at the Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, California. In their “CID” testing this 225,000 pound commercial aircraft was flown solely by remote control by retired Air Force pilot Lt. Colonel Fritz Fulton Jr.

One of the three state of the art “Flight Data Recorders” on this craft was a solid state memory FDR provided by Lear Siegler.

Lear Siegler Inc was created as a result of a merger between the Siegler Corporation (Los Angeles) and Lear Avionics Inc. (Santa Monica) that was concluded in 1961.

John G. Brooks was the founder; President and Chairman of Siegler and “William Lear” was the founder; President and Chairman at Lear. The merger was based on Brooks' goal of growing Siegler into one of the first conglomerates (with a focus on aerospace markets) and Lear’s goal of divesting his ownership interest in Lear to pursue development of his Learjet corporate aircraft (the first pure jet private aircraft).

In its expansion Lear Siegler had acquired Bangor Punta, which was an early conglomerate manufacturing Piper Aircraft, multiple brands of sailboats, Smith and Wesson firearms and other well known brands.

From 1999 until 2001 EG&G was wholly-owned by The Carlyle Group. In March 2002, Lear Siegler was acquired by EG&G Defense Materials Inc. In August 2002, EG&G was acquired by URS Corp.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EG&G

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lear_Siegler

Posted by: paranoia Jun 2 2010, 07:31 PM

pardon the interruption/detour... most of the stuff you guys are discussing is way over my head, but it does remind me of a fairly entertaining vandamme movie:






cheers.gif

Posted by: johnlear Jun 3 2010, 01:53 PM

QUOTE
name='lunk' date='May 31 2010, 12:45 PM' post='10786267']
The speed of anything is completely dependent on time.


Huh?

QUOTE
As time has been shown to vary,


Huh?

QUOTE
a light year distance, may not be that far,


Huh? As far as what?

QUOTE
...if we could control gravity,
which may be the same thing,
as controlling time.


The same thing as what?

QUOTE
i think, to do this, we need to make an electro-gravitational singularity,
a, sort of, contained black-hole, that can be switched on or off.
This maybe achieved by magnetically compressing an electrically charged plasma down to a mathematical point.


Gobeldegock. Pure and Simple.

QUOTE
perhaps the title of this thread
should be changed to
a conversation with John Lear.

John?


Whatever.

Posted by: lunk Jun 3 2010, 03:45 PM

thanks for your answers,
and for, setting me straight...

i think it has been shown though,
that the passage of time
can be different, in different places, in space.

very accurate atomic clocks,
have to be re-calibrated about once a year,
to make up for this small difference of the rate of time
between the Earths surface and satellites, above.

Do you agree that the speed of light is a constant,
in the vacuum of space, throughout the universe?

Posted by: elreb Jun 3 2010, 07:29 PM

A Star is born

To be realistic we should consider most of this to be theory.

Baby stars are said to originate from compressed hydrogen, which like the Hindenburg is large and flammable yet light in weight. Baby Star material is gathered & compressed due to being a member of a system already in motion.

Go away fake “Big Bang”.

Moving forward, just being large does not necessarily make you heavy.

Time is relative (to the extent) that one or two objects in empty space cannot be timed. The nature of objects is that they must be in motion and require the existence of a third object to time the other two.

Most “Objects” in occupied space do not understand time because their path of origin has been changed or warped. A propelled object will travel forever until affected by some other force or object.

Our effective Universe is timeless and is the result of a “Constant State of Change”. People live and people die…so do stars.

Stars turn into Planets…it is really that simple.

Particles like Protons & Electrons not only spin but they also orbit. When released they spin & orbit like an un-sprung spring. Their electromagnetic energy is what gives them gravity…not time and not mass.

But…but gravity can be both positive gravity and it can also be negative gravity. Forces flee & fall due to certain rules.

Objects in space emit light, reflect light or absorb light…it is really that simple.

For the record, the word “light” is inclusive of all electro-magnetic forces

Their “Speed” is relative...also.

Black Planets, mis-titled as “Holes” can act as absorbers.

When an object in space changes its form, it also changes its abilities.

Pari’s book will arrive this week. Nan Nu…Nan…New

Ask, ELreb who answers questions...even goblygook

Posted by: lunk Jun 4 2010, 10:34 AM

John,
what do you think about the "the Hutchison effect"?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hutchison

Posted by: elreb Jun 4 2010, 05:27 PM

Nikola Tesla is another little recognized example of the “Strange Genius Syndrome” & “Creative Genius Syndrome”.

As a “strange Genius” he had an incredible ability to understand complex issues and problems, a profound creativity and imagination, and the ability to channel such skills into productive outlets.

Such as:

Tesla coil
Tesla turbine
Teleforce
Tesla's oscillator
Tesla electric car
Tesla principle
Tesla's Egg of Columbus
Alternating current
Induction motor
Rotating magnetic field
Wireless technology
Particle beam weapon
Death ray
Terrestrial stationary waves
Bifilar coil
Telegeodynamics
Electrogravitics

Posted by: lunk Jun 4 2010, 09:35 PM

QUOTE (elreb @ Jun 4 2010, 02:27 PM) *
Nikola Tesla is another little recognized example of the “Strange Genius Syndrome” & “Creative Genius Syndrome”.

As a “strange Genius” he had an incredible ability to understand complex issues and problems, a profound creativity and imagination, and the ability to channel such skills into productive outlets.

Such as:

Tesla coil
Tesla turbine
Teleforce
Tesla's oscillator
Tesla electric car
Tesla principle
Tesla's Egg of Columbus
Alternating current
Induction motor
Rotating magnetic field
Wireless technology
Particle beam weapon
Death ray
Terrestrial stationary waves
Bifilar coil
Telegeodynamics
Electrogravitics


Yes, but Tesla invented real stuff, that works without him.

The Hutchison effect, seems to only work when Hutchison's around.

Posted by: elreb Jun 4 2010, 09:47 PM

Good point Lurk,

Sorry to say it but our friend John has phased out.

He does not appear to like agreement.

But at your pleasure I would love to banter the subject.

Elreb

Posted by: tnemelckram Jun 4 2010, 10:09 PM

Hi El Reb!

QUOTE
tnemelckram…I have several questions for you.


Here's the best answers I can give within my limitations, which (sadly) are many . . . . .

QUOTE
1. You said, “Why would they even want to slow down to a visible speed”?
Question: I thought that the “Speed of Light” APPLIED TO ALL “electromagnetic radiation” NOT just visible light. I understand that Gamma, X-ray and Ultra Violet radiation arrive first only because of their short wave lengths but do they actually travel faster? Eagles can see things we cannot see and dog hear sounds we cannot hear. I would not think the speed changed only the ability to detect things.

What is relevant here is not what other creatures can detect that we cannot, but rather what humans can detect. After all, it's humans that have detected by seeing the UFO's, and thus reported them. We know that there are limits to the speed at which humans can see things, and that limit is many thousandths less than the speed of light.

Agreed that all of the things that you list must by definition travel at the speed of light. Current thought in quantum physics is that the individual particles that constitute that radiation can produce instantaneous effects on other particles that appear to be not just faster than light, but to totally disregard the speed of light as a limit. But that only applies to individual particles, not to agglomerations of such particles having structural mass with defined shapes such as the types of UFOs that have been reported..


QUOTE
2. ( I said) But we all got off from the same standing start (Big Bang or whatever).
Question: You actually believe that “we all” got off from the same start because I sure do not.

I admit to basing what I say about the "standing start" on the Big Bang because it seems to be the majority opinion among astronomers, physicists and cosmologists, based on at least some evidence from their observations. Of course, I agree that their opinions are shaky and could be wrong, mostly because they themselves all make that disclaimer. But it still appears to be the best we have to go on.

A respectable minority have theories that tend to belie my "standing start", such as Steady State. But even under those conditions there is no reason to believe that we have been any more or less advantaged than, or are more or less advanced than, any of the other intelligent life that I agree currently must exist somewhere else. Then to say that they are so much further ahead that they can do interstellar travel is another leap, and not just a small one, but a quantum leap. It implies either:
( a ) They use our science but are unimaginably further ahead. In this case it doesn't matter whether Einstein or Dr. Spolter are correct, or Big Bangers or Steady Staters are correct, because their theories are all still just variations of "our science" that alien UFOs are also using to fly, or that also enables them to exist in the first place.
or

( b ) They don't use our science at all. In this case, proving our current science wrong and replacing it with something else that is still based on our science would not prove anything because alien UFO's still would not be using, or have their existence based on, any version of our science in the first place.

I guess I have some questions for you.
(1) What theory do you subscribe to instead of Big Bang?
(2) What is the basis for the belief that there must be at least some other intelligent life that is sufficiently advanced to do interstellar flight
(3) Do they, or do they not, use our science to do that?
(4) If they don't use our science, what science do they use?


QUOTE
3. I said) There are very few stars within 100 light years of us.
Question: Why 100 light years when the effective range only need to be 12 ly and the Dog Star solar system has proven it self to have everything you need for life and they are only 8.6 ly away.

My point is that the Drake Equation starts with the vast (infinite?) number of star systems in the universe and reduces it down to many millions that must have planets with conditions capable of generating and sustaining intelligent life, either more or less advanced than us. I agree with that because it uses, for lack of a better term, a "Big Pool" to start, which it narrows down into a "Good Sized Pool" of many millions that could have intelligent life. A Big Pool is necessary at the start so you can increase the odds that there is at least one among the many millions left with intelligent life that is so much further advanced than us that it can do interstellar travel.

My 100 LY limit reduces the Pretty Big Pool from many millions to say 200 star systems, your 12 LYs reduce it to perhaps 2 or 3, while the Dog Star system reduces it to 1. Both of our reductions dramatically (to say the least) reduce the odds on which the Drake Equation is based. Thus they have similar effect on the odds that any intelligent life at all will be found among the reduced number, let alone the quantum leap of life so advanced that it has been able to develop interstellar travel technology.


4. Important Note - Although we debate this esoteric stuff, what's important is that you, Mr. Lear, me and everybody else here agree on one thing - we smell a Big Fat 911 Rat. Even if UFO's are manned by alien intelligence, they have not done anything to harm us or that even suggests harmful intent (at least, not yet). But 911 is clearly real, and putting it mildly, its Perps actually have done quite a lot of harm to us. We are all brothers.

Posted by: elreb Jun 4 2010, 10:55 PM

tnemelckram,

Guess I'll be up late tonight.

Finally, someone with a clue.

I will answer all your questions.

I have more answers than questions.

Elreb

Posted by: tnemelckram Jun 5 2010, 03:22 AM

Hi Again El Reb!

QUOTE
Tnemelckram, You are a very lucky person. . . . . . I agree with . . . John Lear . . ..
Now where you are lucky is in respect that John will answer your apparent questions, yet avoid mine! Seems odd to me!


I think that John sensibly recognizes that people who agree with him are not a problem, but that those who disagree with and question him are a problem. Problems have to be dealt with first, so he naturally tends to favor doing that. He's an iconoclast and original thinker who poses good questions for debate with conventional thinkers, so by nature he seems to expect, welcome and enjoy reverse challenges to his own provocative ideas. He knows his stuff well and gives confident and direct answers. So I don't see anything odd. He seems to be doing what the open minded and formidable guy that we all respect should do.

John has very astutely identified the weakest point in my argument - a key prop is our current science in quantum mechanics and the relationship of the small quantum world to the large Relativistic world. I agree there's reason for doubt there because the two haven't been tied together in a unified theory and actually continue to have some conflicts. So when I read what our best physicists have to say I often ask "how the hell do you know that?' It seems like they are skywriting or making it up as they go along. So if f aliens have developed some way to do interstellar transits, I suppose it would be by making use of "damn quantum jumping" or as Einstein called it "spooky action at a distance" - which has not yet been resolved with Relativity.

QUOTE
John had once stated that most (if not all) UFO’s are man made and real Aliens are in plain sight.


I think the part of the statement I put in bold - all UFO's are man made - .is very likely true. I know that they have shown incredible flight characteristics and other behavior that presumably was or still is beyond human technology. Still, advanced, secret, human built, undisclosed flying objects are a far simpler explanation than one requiring the huge leap into aliens so far advanced that they can do something beyond our comprehension - interstellar transits near, at or over the speed of light.

The fact that all witnesses have described the appearance and behavior of UFO's in terms that are comparative and relative to known human aircraft or other objects is pretty suggestive. "Looked like a saucer" or "too fast for a fighter". I recall one credible estimate of 9000mph speed, but that also means "little less than 3 times faster than SR 71 and little more than half Apollo's escape velocity".

It would make a huge difference if remote control was used instead of a human pilot. That takes away safety and life support concerns. You can do a lot more things and try and fail at even more things on the way. You can try craft with any ridiculous shape, made from anything, and try to make it do 90 degree turns and/or fly 10 times faster than a regular plane. This might make it possible to make, or at least try, something that looks and behaves like any reported UFO.

Finally, is it any coincidence that the Extraterrestrial Highway runs past the Groom Lake Military Test Flight Facility?

Posted by: johnlear Jun 5 2010, 10:47 AM

Sheldon day asked her for a telephone interview for his radio program and here is her response:

From: orbpublishing@msn.com
To: gem3intucson@q.com
Subject: Re: TUCSON,AZ. TALK-SHOW HOST FOR PARI SPOLTER..
Date: Mon, 31 May 2010 19:30:59 -0800


Dear Sheldon Day,

Thank you for your email. My only son, David 44, died March 19. It has been very hard on me.

I appreciate your invitation for a Radio Interview. I do not think I will be a good guest. I do not hear too good. It would be better if you interview John Lear. He has read my book and all my papers. He has asked me many challenging and smart questions in our correspondences. He has a special gift to popularize difficult scientific material and present it in an interesting way. If you pass through Los Angeles, you may want to come to our house for a face to face Interview.

Regards,
Pari Spolter
17648 Arvida Drive
Granada Hills, CA 91344
orbpublishing@msn.com

Posted by: elreb Jun 5 2010, 02:32 PM

tnemelckram…

As to quote #1, it is my understanding that what you can see and not see depends upon whether you are at rest or in motion. I could not see a bullet fired from a gun if I were standing next to it but if I were traveling at 1500 mph I could. I agree that you would not need to orbit the Earth at the speed of light, just simply a fast enough speed to render you un-seeable by a person at rest.

As far as man-made objects traveling at the speed of light, I envision the craft traveling on a distortion in space rather than traveling at that speed on its own…somewhat like a ball floating on a calm lake being moved by waves caused by a landslide. Gravity can be considered as a distortion.

As to quote #2, most astronomers, physicist and cosmologists have more questions than answers because they are on the wrong road.

We live in a “Constant State” system which is in a constant state of change, with no beginning and no end. Stars are born, they live, they die, and lastly they become planets or moons. Planets appear different because they are in different stages of cooling.

Who ever came up with the ‘Big Bang” is an idiot. If for example, matter is neither created nor destroyed…then where did all the original matter of the “Big Bang” come from? You would need more than one Universe to pull it off.

I my “Constant State” universe, nothing is the same age therefore tons of Solar Systems have had millions, if not billions of years, head start.

To that extent, I can’t help but wonder where “Intelligence” came from. Just being human doesn’t make you smart. Intelligence seems to have arrived in the last 13,000 years and from that we learned to make metal tools, build structures, create a written language and start taxing people.

Another creation of Intelligence is War. Recorded history is nothing but one War after another. (Welcome to America)

Intelligence was brought here either as a punishment comparable to Australia being a penal colony or by necessity as if their world was being destroyed.

Needless to say they had “Science” first and only bits and pieces survived to our time.

Their Science was simpler because they got it right the first time unlike us. We are knuckleheads because we are educated by knuckleheads. Our job is to question the garbage we are feed.

As to quote #3, I stay in the 12ly range because it is a livable range and would include those Solar Systems closest to us. I think of it the other way around as to how far I would be willing to travel.

I specifically zero in on 8.6 ly because the “Pup” supernovae 13,000 years ago causing its life forms to move or die. They may have travelled to multiple planets. The sad part is only x-presidents get boarding passes.

As to #4, Important Note- 911 is not the only “Fat Rat” we are being fed but that’s another thread.

And for the record, I don’t believe in UFOs.

Posted by: lunk Jun 5 2010, 03:05 PM

QUOTE (elreb @ Jun 5 2010, 11:32 AM) *
We live in a “Constant State” system which is in a constant state of change, with no beginning and no end. Stars are born, they live, they die, and lastly they become planets or moons. Planets appear different because they are in different stages of cooling.


Hmm, i think it's better then that.
Everything is growing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJfBSc6e7QQ

Posted by: elreb Jun 5 2010, 03:32 PM

Lurk...

Wow...I love it...its prefect...like water expanding as it turns to ice.

The Earth is growing.

Yippie


1.The Pangea theory is completely wrong.
2. There is no Laurasia.
3. There is/was no Godswanaland
4. There was no Tethys Sea.
5. Finally it means that dinosaurs migrated (as Neal said) from the Northern Hemisphere to the Southern Hemisphere as only birds do now.

http://www.nealadams.com/EarthProject/antipangea.html

Posted by: lunk Jun 5 2010, 04:09 PM

QUOTE (elreb @ Jun 5 2010, 12:32 PM) *
Lurk...

Wow...I love it...its prefect...like water expanding as it turns to ice.

The Earth is growing.

Yippie


1.The Pangea theory is completely wrong.
2. There is no Laurasia.
3. There is/was no Godswanaland
4. There was no Tethys Sea.
5. Finally it means that dinosaurs migrated (as Neal said) from the Northern Hemisphere to the Southern Hemisphere as only birds do now.

http://www.nealadams.com/EarthProject/antipangea.html


Part of the reason i like being here,
pilots must think in 3D.

Non-pilots tend to think of the world,
as a 2D road map.

And we know there are more dimensions.

Posted by: elreb Jun 5 2010, 06:02 PM

Lurk…sorry but I owe you one

Needless to say, this literally expands my model of the Universe.

When a Star collapses, it is more compressed and very hot. Over time, as it cools it also expands. With the addition of water the process is accelerated.

I have always argued against Pangea and Godswanaland but never knowing why.

The real point is that only a dead Star could act this way. thumbsup.gif

Posted by: lunk Jun 5 2010, 06:12 PM

If we can't figure out the true workings of this universe, while we are in it,
how can we ever expect to figure out the workings of the next universe,
if there is one?

Posted by: elreb Jun 5 2010, 07:44 PM

Lurk…

Well, seeing as you brought up the subject, we can and do have other Universes.

A Universe should not be confused with “Space” as they are not the same.

Space is what you have when you remove everything.

A Universe is like an elastic soap bubble that is enclosed yet not perfect.

Due to the rule of “All possibilities” every now and again a “Black Planet” can pass thru or beyond the event horizon of its Universe. Once you are outside the bubble, you are no longer affected by the rules of your former Universe. Party time!

“Black Planets” mis-titled as holes are very dense objects and like a pregnant Salmon, when conditions are right, will release all of its stored babies or potential babies.

This in effect, could be titled as a “Big Bang”, but the matter would be very old.

Today, we call it recycling. But even in this baby Universe, it does not act like the Scientist clowns have told you. As you stated, a Pilot lives in a 4 dimensional world because time is a factor.

Because “Black Planets” carry history, they also carry rules that govern what comes next.

Posted by: johnlear Jun 5 2010, 10:22 PM

QUOTE (elreb @ Jun 3 2010, 05:32 PM) *
And for the record, I don’t believe in UFOs.



Well shoot! That explains everything.

Posted by: elreb Jun 6 2010, 06:02 PM

Also caulk up Spirits, devils, demons, big foot, Sasquatch, Yeti, Nuk-luk, Jesus, Nessie, Ogopogo , and other modern-day myths, as a mix of hoaxes and wishful thinking.

Words like UFO and Conspiracy Theory are given negative conations to cover up reality.

I agree with tnemelckram…” Undisclosed Flying Objects” are a far simpler explanation.

Posted by: lunk Jun 6 2010, 07:20 PM

Believing in something, without evidence,
is the same as not believing in something,
without evidence.

And debating beliefs usually leads to frustration, or worse.

i know, and have met people, who claim they have actually seen unexplainable flying objects, and i know most of them were not joking, but all i have to go on,
is their own understanding of their experience.

i have taken a few pictures that have had moving lights (orbs?) in them in the middle of the day, that i didn't know i even pictured.
And there was two group photos where i appeared to be shrouded in mist, (i wasn't),
but in 2 separate photographs. everyone else around me, looked clearly normal.
Really weird.

Two properties of photography is that it can grab a moment of time shorter than we can see, and normal cameras can pick up some frequencies outside normal vision.

There were some dark orbs discovered in separate simultaneous pictures,
i think in the x-ray, band in the corona of the sun, taken from satellites.
NASA said it was just cosmic rays, of course.

Could these be the black-body planets that you are talking about?
Like spores of the universe?

Posted by: elreb Jun 6 2010, 09:02 PM

Lurk…asked, Could these be the black-body planets that you are talking about? Like spores of the universe?

Good observation, thanks for reading my gooblygook.

In the simplest of terms, natural objects in Space will emit light as a Star does, it can reflect light as a white planet/moon does or it can absorb light as a black planet.

It is understood that all electromagnetic forces can be glumped together as “Light”.

Two “Stars” for Lurk
: One for “Expanding planets” and one for “Spores of the Universe”.

Black Planets are proof that you can exceed the “Speed of Light” and what they do with that energy is another subject.

It is thought that a Black Planet is located at the core of the Milky Way. I would suggest that there are several hundred Black Planets spread thru out our Galaxy.

In a “Constant State” system, you must allow for growth and Black Planets are the perfect candidate to act as a “Spore”.

Generically pre disposed to growth. Think about it…where does all the material come from to build new Stars?

Posted by: lunk Jun 7 2010, 11:11 PM

i deleted the last 3 posts as requested by Elreb.
(hope that's ok with you John)

Posted by: elreb Jun 7 2010, 11:39 PM

Gosh Lunk,

I owe you 3 perks now. (One for calling you Lurk)

I apologize once again to John.

I was watching “Collateral Murder” and was very upset.

Posted by: lunk Jun 8 2010, 08:42 PM

Thinking about extra-terrestrials a little more...

The universe is a vast place of space.
Life as we know it, requires,
water, energy, and gravity to grow.
Water has been found, throughout the universe.
but the only energy source are fundamentally, stars.

So if one was looking for aliens, in the universe,
they should find them around stars, absorbing energy.

...i know, "they're just cosmic rays."

Posted by: elreb Jun 8 2010, 09:34 PM

BINGO,

Stars emit energy and planets reflect much of it.

Sure wish Tnemelkram would engage.

Heck, he am smart two.

Posted by: tnemelckram Jun 8 2010, 09:34 PM

Hi El Reb! And thanks for the interest!

1.

QUOTE
As far as man-made objects traveling at the speed of light, I envision the craft traveling on a distortion in space rather than traveling at that speed on its own…somewhat like a ball floating on a calm lake being moved by waves caused by a landslide. Gravity can be considered as a distortion.


I agree that is a possible way to do the trick. It might also make even the faster than light travel that Mr. Lear posits possible. As I said, another possible way is by exploiting something related to the failure to unify the Relativities with Quantum Mechanics (IIRC, in particular with electromagnetism and/or Gravity?)

2.
QUOTE
I my “Constant State” universe, nothing is the same age therefore tons of Solar Systems have had millions, if not billions of years, head start.


I agree that the universe could be Constant State.

( a )But even in such a universe, you would have a constant cycle in which intelligent civilizations with such head starts die out instead of their number remaining constant or ever-growing. You sort of make this point here:
QUOTE
Another creation of Intelligence is War. Recorded history is nothing but one War after another. . . . . .Intelligence was brought here either as a punishment comparable to Australia being a penal colony or by necessity as if their world was being destroyed.


( b ) In addition, such advanced civilizations would have to be at a point where they are interested in communicating with us. Such interest is consistent with the apparent repeat visits suggested by the many sightings since 1947 and must be the case if, as some say, there have been such communications with government that we aren't being told about. But I think it's a leap to presuppose any interest in communicating with us because: (i) if they are so far advanced, it should be obvious to them that they have nothing to gain from it; so (ii) any window of time where they would be both just advanced enough for interstellar transit but not so advanced to preclude such benefit must be small.

3.
QUOTE
I agree with tnemelckram…” Undisclosed Flying Objects” are a far simpler explanation.

I see three possible meanings:
( a ) The UFO's are advanced human craft which haven't been disclosed to us, as I suggest.
( b ) The government knows that they are advanced alien craft but hasn't disclosed that to us.
( c ) Or, taking what I say a bit further, aliens UFO's exist but haven't disclosed themselves to us yet because they all traveled past us at speeds approaching, at or beyond that of light. If they are all too fast for us to see in the first place, none of the reported UFO sightings would be of the real alien UFOs!

Posted by: elreb Jun 8 2010, 10:38 PM


Tnemelckram,

You and Lunk are unbelievably brilliant.


One of my major points is that being human…does “not” make you smart, let alone “Intelligent”.

Most animal are more “Intelligent” than humans. .Animals kill; to survive and humans kill because it’s fun.

If I were an advanced civilization, why on god’s earth, would I want to communicate with trash!

We are an experiment that went bad.

My family, including myself has been involved in every “War” since the Revolution.

Would you really want to talk to the “CIA”? Water boarding is like going to the dentist.

No pain…no gain!

Posted by: lunk Jun 8 2010, 10:48 PM

UFO's, could also be life forms,
rather than crafts, perhaps,
existing at a different scale than us,
like some sort of evolved moth,
flitting from star to star...

Most of the vehicles we build, reflect the known lifeforms around us.

The caterpillar, for instance...
or we could get into car names...

...it makes me wonder where the idea for the farm auger came from...
some farmer, or possibly a biologist...

Posted by: elreb Jun 9 2010, 12:13 AM

Lunk,

We are really “not” divided on this issue.

It’s hard to say how many people are outside the “Brainwashing box”!

A safe number is 45% and within in that only 2% know what is really going on.

The moth “flitting” from Star to Star is “You”.

We are controlled by wealth & power because where there is power there is control.

Our families are being “stomped” into the ground by a power that has no regard for human life.

Welcome to the “US” government.

Disclaimer: The “US” government is not America.

We must lay the ground work to bring "Intelligence" to the Earth people.

Posted by: elreb Jun 9 2010, 03:53 PM

Just got my copy of “Gravitational Force of the Sun” and have glossed over most of it.

I would recommend it all freethinkers.

I was also reading the critics like David Pratt and Paulo Correa.

Be strong Pari…keep up the fight.

Thanks for the heads up John

Posted by: tnemelckram Jun 9 2010, 05:10 PM

Hi Lunk!

QUOTE
UFO's, could also be life forms, rather than crafts, perhaps, existing at a different scale than us, . . .


I agree that's possible. What you are saying is that the flying body itself, and not things the flying body is designed and intended to convey, is the life form. Hell. look at all of the talk about us approaching a Technological Singularity even with our own computer technology and artificial intelligence. We are based on carbon, why couldn't another life form be based on silicon, or something else?

Although for all the reasons stated above, I would have to say that if you want to call them UFO's, these are most likely best classified as Unseen Flying Objects or Unperceived Flying Objects, not as Unidentified Flying Objects or Undisclosed Flying Objects.

Posted by: Tamborine man Jun 10 2010, 04:51 AM

Perhaps the time has come to throw some Light on this subject!

The Earth is the ONLY planet in the universe, in our 3-dimensional
world, that is occupied with intelligent life.

Every human being survives 'death', and returns to his or her abode
in the 4-dimensional 'transcendental' world.

Six spheres or habitats exist around the Earth (bordered within the
orbit of the moon), which is the home to all mankind who are still
subject to reincarnations.

".......
The transcendental dwelling places are as visible and material to spiritual beings as everything on Earth is to humans. The higher the spirits advance in their struggle out of Darkness, the more rapid will be the ether-vibrations that produce the material from which these, their limited worlds, are formed. The more distant are the dwelling places from the Earth, the brighter, the more splendid, the more harmonious everything becomes—dwellings and nature alike, such as seas, rivers, lakes, lands, flowers, etc. As long as the spirit stays in the sphere it has reached by purification through its reincarnations—that is, earthly rebirths—its body moves about just as one moves about on Earth, that is, by walking, running, etc. However, the movements of the released spirit are quicker and easier, just as the thought is more lucid and more precise than when the spirit is bound to the heavy earthly body that imposes so many restrictions upon it.

Methods of transportation in the spheres are similar to those on Earth, but better, faster and more comfortable. All innovations and improvements that over time have been brought to humanity have first been tested in the spheres, before they have become a reality on Earth.

When the Youngest associate with inhabitants of the various Spheres and of the Earth and desire not to avail themselves of the Passage of Light, they exert the energy of their thought and will to transport their spirit-body by the ether that extends everywhere by virtue of the fourth dimension.

A further explanation of the fourth dimension cannot be given, because man as yet lacks the basis for an understanding of this concept.

The higher spheres are invisible to the inhabitants of the lower ones. The lower spheres are partly invisible to the inhabitants of the higher, and even the Youngest have only a moderately clear view of them, when, borne by the vibrations of the ether, they move from sphere to sphere, or from place to place within the different spheres.

The inhabitants of the lower spheres cannot on their own, either by thought and will or by the Passage of Light, ascend to worlds above their own sphere. They can descend only to the Earth31 or to the lower spheres in between, and only through the Passage of Light. However, within their home-sphere and the sphere of the Earth, they are able to move about by thought and will, but to a limited extent. They are thus unable to penetrate strong concentrations of Light or ethereal Light-radiations.

God’s Servants and the Youngest can move about everywhere by the power of their thought and will and therefore do not always use the Passage of Light. If they desire, they can even make their way through the Earth’s numerous accumulations of Darkness.

In the course of time, God has created a variety of animal figures for the enjoyment of human spirits, birds, horses, dogs, cats, etc.—so that they should not miss the purely earthly surroundings too much. However, these are not astral counterparts of earthly animals, but rather thought-forms not possessed of everlasting life. When the spheres have served their purpose as temporary habitations for the spirits, these animal figures, only temporarily contained in and by the Thought of God and therefore having no eternal life, will disappear. By the Will of God they are returned to the matter from which He fashioned them, dissolving and reverting to their original state—the Light-ether. But as long as the spheres exist, human spirits will always be able to find represented there the animals they most cherished during life on Earth. And since God creates these animal figures to conform exactly to their earthly prototypes, all will be able to find their favorite horse, dog, cat, bird, and so on.
......."

......."
As soon as particles escape human observation, they belong under the forms of the 4-dimensional world. But some forms are transitional between the three- and
four-dimensional worlds. The particles of these forms can be observed at one moment, but the next, they evade human observation. This depends on whether a
material or immaterial influence predominates at a given moment. Also, the presence of particles of other forms can be recognized but not perceived. These particles
then belong on the boundary between the three- and the four-dimensional worlds and deflect on either side of the boundary.
......."

The more astute, the more intelligent, the more evolved of the readers of this, is strongly encouraged to search further from the direction given here.
For this is but a snippet of further information available to the true and honest seeker of Truth.

So get rid of your fears, and move on, for heavens sake ....... and for your own sake too, of course!

If this happens, then we can go on to talk about the REAL Universe in the "Life after death" thread later on.... perhaps!

Cheers

Posted by: Tamborine man Jun 10 2010, 11:14 AM

As a little afterthought, the following might be of some help
to people who cannot quite understand the previous post:


".......
Many will insist that, as one can plainly see, there cannot possibly exist inhabited worlds around the Earth, because they would obstruct the view of the luminous globes in outer space. Thus an analogy with earthly conditions will be given here that may make it easier to understand the presence of the spheres.

If one looks, for instance, into the clear, still water of a woodland pond one can distinctly see the plant and animal life therein, but one sees not the myriad life forms that teem in the water itself. Should a drop of the water then be examined under a microscope, an abundance of living organisms, a profusion of microscopic infusoria, is discovered whose existence would not otherwise be suspected. It is somewhat similar with the spheres, not perceivable by the physical organs of sight yet to the spiritual—the “enlarged” or strengthened—sight, easily discernible.
......."

Cheers

Posted by: tnemelckram Jun 10 2010, 07:34 PM

Hi Tamborine Man!

QUOTE
The Earth is the ONLY planet in the universe, in our 3-dimensional world, that is occupied with intelligent life.
Every human being survives 'death', and returns to his or her abode in the 4-dimensional 'transcendental' world.


I'm not in a position to rule that out, but I note that our science already regards Time as the 4th dimension and I think the accuracy of that is pretty apparent to just about all lay people. You appear to need another dimension or two!

Posted by: elreb Jun 10 2010, 08:48 PM

We have “Maui Wowie” here in the Islands and it is pretty good stuff but I need whatever “Tamborine Man” is smoking.

“Tnemelckram” is correct in stating that the 4th dimension is time. Pilots already know this!

The fifth dimension is beyond “Time” or timeless.

There is also a sixth & seventh dimension but if you don’t get the first 5, well you have no need for the rest.

Posted by: tnemelckram Jun 10 2010, 10:45 PM

Hi El Reb and all!

QUOTE
The fifth dimension is beyond “Time” or timeless. There is also a sixth & seventh dimension but if you don’t get the first 5, well you have no need for the rest.


Here's a neat video that pretty clearly explains all ten of the dimensions that the quantum guys work with:

http://vodpod.com/watch/1367123-imagine-the-tenth-dimension

Posted by: Tamborine man Jun 11 2010, 07:46 AM

QUOTE (tnemelckram @ Jun 9 2010, 12:45 AM) *
Hi El Reb and all!



Here's a neat video that pretty clearly explains all ten of the dimensions that the quantum guys work with:

http://vodpod.com/watch/1367123-imagine-the-tenth-dimension


Truly sorry to have to say this, but that video is rather primitive
in its explanation about dimensions.

"Dimensions" has absolutely nothing to do with "time" or silly lines,
but are solely determined by the various size of particles and their vibrations
(frequencies).

'Time' as we 'experience' it, together with 'the rhythm of time' is absolute
relative and can therefore not be used as reality. Only 'the sequence of
events' can be used in this regard.

Science has still a long way to go to catch up; as it should be remembered
they only deal with the forces and the powers of Darkness.

"Vibrations of Darkness covers an extremely long scale from the lowest to the
highest velocity, concentration and radiation that manifest themselves as
numerous immaterial and material forms, for example:
1) power, i.e., electricity, electromagnetism, steam power, and so forth;
2) ,radiation such as sunlight (the solar rays of the lower or lowest frequencies
originate from the Sun's core of Darkness), phosphorescent light, artificial light
(produced by electricity, gas, oil, etc.) heat, radioactivity, and so on;
3) matter and substance, besides many, many other forms still unknown."

The force and the power of Light is not yet investigated by science, so they are
still mistaken and in error about many important subjects, so don't take everything
they come up with as gospel truth ......please!

This subject has been touch upon over at the "Life after death" thread, where
also the true geometry of the great Pyramid has been revealed.

You and elreb are welcome to visit and try to debunk to your hearts delight,
but i think both of you will have a rather hard time doing so! wink.gif

On the other matter, let me just say to elreb that he certainly wouldn't be
disappointed! thumbsup.gif

cheers

Posted by: tnemelckram Jun 11 2010, 09:21 AM

Hi Tamborine Man!

I agree the video is primitive. But that's the point, to show dummies like me what they mean when they talk about ten dimensions. The lines are just visual aids for that purpose, not a representation of how the particles behave in them, whether by vibrating or doing anything else.

I agree that time is best thought of as a sequence of events relative to these matters. Our standard conception of clock time shown by numbers should be disregarded because they are just artificial constructs that give us a common standard for measuring and using time. But purely sequential time is a particle dimension because the particles behave in sequences (vibration would be a to-fro sequence). I thought the video portrayed time only as a sequence of events without mentioning or depicting clock time.

As for the rest of your Post, I don't intend to debunk other peoples views on UFO's or the nature of reality, just state my views, the reasons for them, kick it around with other people, and learn something from what they say as well. I try to keep everyone's viewpoint open and on the table. There are several reasons for this:
1. I am not qualified to be a scientist so my views are not competent.
2. I don't fully understand the subject matter. That requires math, and I don't like math.
3. The explanations by the scientists for my views aren't satisfying and sometimes sound made up as they go along.
4. The scientists themselves say 3.
So I'm in no position to say that you or Mr. Lear are wrong. All I can do is give reasons why something else is more likely to be right. I probably slip into a debunking tone sometimes but its not my intent. I just like a good civil argument and when I start on ideas I just can't stop breaking them down into smaller bits and then reconnecting the bits my way.
.

Posted by: tnemelckram Jun 11 2010, 09:45 AM

Andanuddating . . .I guess my bottom line on various scientific and other views of reality vis a vis UFO's..

All of the reports of UFO's describe things having appearances and behaviors that are consistent with the majority views of our scientists, cosmology or religious beliefs, and most importantly consistent with the conditions that enable us to exist, which is the four dimensional world we believe. Any minority or alternative views, even if correct, are still just another version of our science, cosmology or religion, and most importantly, still must be consistent with the conditions that enable us to exist. The UFO reports "are what they are" and can't change, so they will always be consistent with our reality even if minority or alternative views of reality prove to be the correct and replace current views.

Posted by: elreb Jun 11 2010, 12:38 PM

Before I get started today I would like to point out that we must separate History from Science and Science from Religion and make an attempt to keep them on different pages.

Of course it may be too late as things are so jumbled up now.

There are two completely different types of light; “The light of Science and the Light of Religion”.

The following is where "Tamborine man" may seems to be.

It was once told that “Divine Light” was trapped in “Evil Matter” but freed itself by attaining “Special Knowledge” allowing itself to rejoin the true god living in the world of “Light”.

This world of light was “Enlightenment”.

Enlightenment was simply recognizing that evil matter was ignorance and that special knowledge was simply the “Knowledge of Truth” and the Wisdom of how to use that Knowledge.

To save one’s self from humanity’s present condition you need to use “your own inner efforts” and accept nothing unconditionally.

Churches, governments and private enterprises want you to believe in their “Evil Matter” as the primary source and legitimacy for their authority.

Posted by: elreb Jun 11 2010, 05:44 PM

In one hand, I also see “Time” as being relative and man-made.

In the other hand I hold an Apple seed.

I plant the apparent 3D seed in the ground and water it, then its 4D tree time begins & its 3D seed time ends.

The 4D tree grows, produces Apples and dies. I cut up the Tree and make it into 3D furniture.

I eat the Apple and spit out the seeds into my 4D hand.

So you have the time of the person, the time of the seed, the time of the tree, the time of the apple and the time of the chair.

Is the “rest time” of the seed or the “rest time” of the chair considered as time?

Is the seed really dead or just dormant? Duration should be considered as a dimension.

Posted by: elreb Jun 12 2010, 10:22 PM

Tnemelckram, Lunk, Tamborine man, Spolter...

If objects in space emit light, reflect light or absorb light...

How does one Star "act or react" to another Star's light?

Does it absorb it , reflect it, or something else?

Posted by: lunk Jun 13 2010, 12:25 AM

...i hope we aren't scaring off johnlear,
with all these ideas.

They are quite "wild" by comparison to most of which we are told.

i do have a bit of a problem with reincarnation.

Reincarnation, has been used as an excuse for the demise of people.
Like in the notion that, they experienced this retribution,
because of something they did, in a "past life".

That's a pretty lame excuse for accidentally bombing civilians, for instance.

As most people have no recollection of any past life,
doesn't this imply that this excuse should not be used, or even thought of,
for justification of such an event?!

In my humble opinion.

Posted by: lunk Jun 13 2010, 12:30 AM

Elreb,
if i shine two flashlights at each other,
what happens?

(edit) oops spelling.

Posted by: elreb Jun 13 2010, 12:45 PM

Lunk,

Flash lights, light bulbs and headlights do not really work that well due to having glass lenses.

I do realize that concentrated light hitting each other at angles, as in spot lights, combine and intensify.

As to John, I don’t believe anything scares him.

If you go back to the beginning of the thread, you may notice that the spot lights have moved off the “target”.

Don’t get me wrong, I have a very open mind and enjoy the “challenge of learning” something new.

You got Apples and you got Lemons.

Posted by: Tamborine man Jun 14 2010, 12:40 AM

QUOTE (tnemelckram @ Jun 9 2010, 11:21 AM) *
Hi Tamborine Man!

I agree the video is primitive. But that's the point, to show dummies like me what they mean when they talk about ten dimensions. The lines are just visual aids for that purpose, not a representation of how the particles behave in them, whether by vibrating or doing anything else.

I agree that time is best thought of as a sequence of events relative to these matters. Our standard conception of clock time shown by numbers should be disregarded because they are just artificial constructs that give us a common standard for measuring and using time. But purely sequential time is a particle dimension because the particles behave in sequences (vibration would be a to-fro sequence). I thought the video portrayed time only as a sequence of events without mentioning or depicting clock time.

As for the rest of your Post, I don't intend to debunk other peoples views on UFO's or the nature of reality, just state my views, the reasons for them, kick it around with other people, and learn something from what they say as well. I try to keep everyone's viewpoint open and on the table. There are several reasons for this:
1. I am not qualified to be a scientist so my views are not competent.
2. I don't fully understand the subject matter. That requires math, and I don't like math.
3. The explanations by the scientists for my views aren't satisfying and sometimes sound made up as they go along.
4. The scientists themselves say 3.
So I'm in no position to say that you or Mr. Lear are wrong. All I can do is give reasons why something else is more likely to be right. I probably slip into a debunking tone sometimes but its not my intent. I just like a good civil argument and when I start on ideas I just can't stop breaking them down into smaller bits and then reconnecting the bits my way.
.


Hi kram, (you can always call me 'tam' - saves time)

we are told that it take the rays from the Sun 8 minutes to reach Earth.
While you sit comfortably and count to 480, i sit here and type this to you.

You'll experience this exercise boring, tedious and exceedingly slow, as i on
the contrary will experience the same time frame totally and utterly the
opposite. For me 'the time' ceases to 'exist', but if i should become aware of
it, it would be only to find how amazingly quickly 'time' has 'disappeared'!

As humankind continue to evolve and progress, this discrepancy in the
perception of the 'concept of time' will accordingly grow wider and wider, so
as one day it will become necessary to be replaced with 'something' else,
(like f. ex. "time-periods") together with another understanding of this concept.

My 'debunk' comment was not to be taken too serious. Just my clumsy attempt
to lure you over to have a look at something you never have heard of before!

A propos:

1) You NOT being a scientist probably makes you more competent to comment,
as your mind would be more open and free.

2) No, it does NOT require math at all, just common sense, and it appears you got
plenty of that.

3) I must agree with that.

To feel that something sounds more 'right' than other things, require that one be
knowledgeable about ALL alternative views, before one can make up one's mind.
There's another 'view' you haven't heard of before on the 'Life after death' thread! wink.gif

Cheers

Posted by: Tamborine man Jun 14 2010, 01:53 AM

QUOTE (elreb @ Jun 9 2010, 07:44 PM) *
In one hand, I also see “Time” as being relative and man-made.

In the other hand I hold an Apple seed.

I plant the apparent 3D seed in the ground and water it, then its 4D tree time begins & its 3D seed time ends.

The 4D tree grows, produces Apples and dies. I cut up the Tree and make it into 3D furniture.

I eat the Apple and spit out the seeds into my 4D hand.

So you have the time of the person, the time of the seed, the time of the tree, the time of the apple and the time of the chair.

Is the “rest time” of the seed or the “rest time” of the chair considered as time?

Is the seed really dead or just dormant? Duration should be considered as a dimension.


Hi elreb,

yes, you're absolutely right, 'Light' and 'enlightenment' is certainly inviolably connected.

Just one little point.
The Light was never "trapped" in Darkness, in as much as the biggest particles constituting
the power of Light is much smaller than the smallest particles constituting the power of
Darkness.
Bear in mind that the larger or smaller the particles, the slower or faster are their vibrations
or oscillations; bu also, the smaller the particles the stronger and greater are their ability of
mutual attraction, cohesion and adhesion.
Therefore, the Light exist on a much higher dimension than that of Darkness.

Primal Darkness is therefore characterized by chaos, disorder and confusion, whereas
Primal Light is characterized by balance, order and harmony.


And the apple seed is a good example to describe the difference between 'dimensions',
for "inside" the apple seed is already the appearance of the fully grown apple, but
undetectable by the physical 3-dimensional naked eye.

The same applies to the human fertilized egg of course. Also in this, you'll find a 'picture'
or 'blueprint' of the appearance of the human body fully grown, and with latent
hereditary components from both the father, the mother and, in many cases, grandfather.
So the division of the ensuing cells will correspond in their growth exactly to the
predetermined 4-dimensional 'blueprint' to form a body in the 3-dimensional world.

'Life' could simply not exist without the 4-dimensional element.

If you f. ex. cut of a branch from a rose bush and want to graft it on to another
rose bush, then this have to take place within 20 minutes, before the 4- dimensional
'astral counterpart' separates itself from the cut-off branch, thereby render this finally
'death', with no change to ever be used for grafting again.
Its 'life vitality' is no longer present, and after a longer or shorter period the branch
will revert back to the same components and substance from which it was created in
the first instance.

cheers

Posted by: Tamborine man Jun 14 2010, 02:42 AM

QUOTE (elreb @ Jun 11 2010, 12:22 AM) *
Tnemelckram, Lunk, Tamborine man, Spolter...

If objects in space emit light, reflect light or absorb light...

How does one Star "act or react" to another Star's light?

Does it absorb it , reflect it, or something else?



The planets simply reflect the light-rays from the stars.

Stars are too far from each other, so the rays from these mutually,
will have no particular influence or effect upon each other.

Most rays from our Sun that's not caught by planets etc. are
absorbed by cumulus' of Darkness drifting around in outer space,
or simply absorbed by the ether as they eventually loose their
power or vitality.

Rays from the Sun or other rays consist of particles of various sizes,
and they all have in common that no "point" can exist on their parts
so rays can never collide. (Ref. to new axiom in 'Life after death' thread)!

Thus, Cern's great hadron collider has been an enormous waste of
energy and money; by 10 000 scientists and 10 billion dollars,
for they will never succeed in colliding particles against each other.
And there never existed such a 'thing' as a "big bang".

Oh well, we all have to learn the hard way, i suppose!

Cheers

Posted by: Tamborine man Jun 14 2010, 03:15 AM

QUOTE (lunk @ Jun 11 2010, 03:25 AM) *
...i hope we aren't scaring off johnlear,
with all these ideas.

They are quite "wild" by comparison to most of which we are told.

i do have a bit of a problem with reincarnation.

Reincarnation, has been used as an excuse for the demise of people.
Like in the notion that, they experienced this retribution,
because of something they did, in a "past life".

That's a pretty lame excuse for accidentally bombing civilians, for instance.

As most people have no recollection of any past life,
doesn't this imply that this excuse should not be used, or even thought of,
for justification of such an event?!

In my humble opinion.



Hi Lunk,
Here's the answer to the question about reincarnation from the transcendental world.

".......
Is reincarnation really necessary? And how is the Law of Retribution applied?


The purpose of reincarnation is to allow human spirits to mature through a gradual and many-sided process to the point that they are able to reject the influence of Darkness in all circumstances of life.

When human spirits undergo their first earthly lives, their spiritual egos—represented by thought and will—are but comparable to the faintest spark of the Light. Their earliest lives on Earth are then little more than a form of passive existence—of becoming accustomed to the human condition. After having undergone some initial incarnations, the spiritual ego begins to react to the guidance of the conscience—the guardian spirit. But it should be obvious that those individuals who stand at a very low spiritual level possess not as sensitive a “conscience” as do those more spiritually advanced. And since the new and the very young spirits predominate in the lower human races, the “spiritual laws” whereby a “savage”, for example, is judged, cannot be equally applied to a member of a civilized society. Savages, embodying very young spirits, are not yet able to respect human life or property. They cannot be judged alike, spiritually, as those humans who, through spiritual and worldly upbringing, have been taught to respect such values but yet, possessing this greater inner depth, still kill and rob. Not until the ego learns to distinguish between “mine” and “thine” and comes to understand the value of human life is there accountability for those sinful actions of whose consequences the ego is then spiritually aware. For the slightest violation of conscience must result in penalty—the necessity to atone. When the ego is aware that a certain act must by nature bring penalty, then that individual of free will breaks the law in committing that act, and by abuse of that freedom becomes subject to the Law of Retribution and cannot evade the consequences. Only full repentance through prayer can bring the forgiveness of God, and only appeals to wronged fellow humans can bring the possibility of their forgiveness and thereby remove the need for severe repercussions.

Human sin can be divided into two chief categories:

1) Sin against God and against the divine within one’s self. Only God can forgive this, and with His forgiveness the guilt of such sin is annulled forever.

2) Sin against others. This is of course also sin against God, but in such instances forgiveness must also come from those wronged before the guilt can be annulled, even though the transgressor already be forgiven by God.

Forgiveness of sin against God or against the “holy”, the divine22 within one’s self, can be obtained while the transgressor yet lives on Earth, if the guilt is fully understood and there is full repentance of the base, evil and unlawful thoughts and actions involved. Belief in the death of atonement of Jesus alters in no way human guilt of sin, and gives no remission of sin to anyone.

If humans cannot admit or repent of sin and guilt during life on Earth they must do so after their mortal departure, since all human spirits are confronted upon awakening in the astral spheres with a recapitulation of their earthly acts. When finally they do repent, God’s forgiveness is immediate and the matter is closed. Atonement is unnecessary, for God’s qualities of mercy and compassion, manifested of His love, stand above the Law of Retribution.

If humans sin against others and, while yet on Earth, admit to such deeds or designs—thus repenting in full—but then are denied forgiveness when they earnestly seek it of those they have wronged, they can be spared repercussion through the power of God’s love and compassion. However, they must in new lives on Earth carry out an act of love for those originally sinned against. But the moment one obtains forgiveness from a fellow human, guilt is annulled without call for future atonement, for human mercy and compassion also transcends the Law of Retribution.

Should anyone wrong another and admit not guilt nor seek forgiveness of the victim while both are yet on Earth, the transgressor will after death be confronted in the beyond with the wrongful act. Then the deed must be meditated upon until finally understanding of its sinful nature comes, and grief and remorse awaken. But often then it is too late to win the victim’s forgiveness. It happens perhaps that the victim does not return from life on Earth during the transgressor’s allotted period for rest and learning. Or the victim may belong in a higher Sphere barred to the transgressor. Or it may happen that the victim returns to the transgressor’s sphere but will not forgive. In such cases, the transgressor must submit to the full severity of the Law of Retribution and atone later on Earth, that is, endure the spiritual or physical suffering drawn to oneself. Through such experience the transgressor learns care so that, if ever again tempted to do similar wrong, it is easier to resist acting against the conscience.

The Youngest are also subject to the Law of Retribution, but they acknowledge their earthly sins much sooner than do humans. Consequently, repentance and forgiveness comes easier to the Youngest who thus mostly avoid the law’s consequences. Yet even in face of a transgressor’s deep remorse it can happen that the victim for a long time refuses to forgive, both in life on Earth and in the astral world. When that happens, the one who refuses forgiveness is incarnated without mission, without service as one of the pioneers of mankind—living as any ordinary human. The transgressor then serves as the guardian spirit during the wronged person’s subsequent incarnations until the wronged one has overcome all anger and hatred. For any who nurture hatred, who are irreconcilable, are of no use to God in the work of love that the Youngest are carrying out on behalf of mankind’s journey toward the Light.

Therefore, while they are yet on Earth all should seek to repent of their errors, of their sinful and criminal thoughts and acts, and in remorse ask forgiveness of God as well as of their fellow beings before their earthly lives close. Much grief and suffering will thereby be prevented. The guidance of the conscience should be heeded closely in all aspects of life, for the more the conscience is disregarded, the more difficult it becomes to follow its advice, its admonitions and its warnings. By yielding to their own desires, their own base inclinations, human beings increase the number of their incarnations.

There is one provision under the Law of Retribution none can avoid except the youngest of human spirits, not yet able to respond to their conscience. Applying to the spiritual ego of humans and the Youngest and Eldest alike, this provision requires that all who commit acts of murder or in some other way cause loss of life of fellow beings, must, in a subsequent incarnation, save from sudden death the same number of lives taken.

However, this provision can be applied in different ways. Those judged and penalized under earthly law have nothing more for which to atone. But since God’s law requires that those who kill must in later incarnations save lives, anyone already punished under earthly law will comply with this provision through an act of love, giving them the protection of God so that they emerge unharmed from the perilous task. Not so for those who have evaded earthly justice. They are protected neither by the guardian spirit nor by God during attempts to save other lives. They never escape some form of harm, such as death, maiming, prolonged illness, burns, or the like. In other words, they must atone for past crimes with their own lives or with bodily suffering. Thus God’s Law of Retribution can in certain cases require a life for a life; however, the earthly courts of law have not a similar right.

Those who as earthly rulers, military commanders, or leaders of the people are indirectly responsible for the loss of great numbers of lives during wars and uprisings or through death penalties, can expiate their guilt in subsequent incarnations by saving a large number of people from impending catastrophe, for example through action to avert man-made or natural disasters, as inventors making safe otherwise dangerous occupations, or as scientists who find ways to prevent or control the diseases that are such a scourge to mankind in so many ways. God Himself ensures through this provision the correct balance between the human lives lost and those lives that in compensation are to be saved from premature or painful death.

The last two means of atonement apply only to the Youngest and partly to the Eldest, since human spirits clearly possess not sufficient spiritual stability to be inventors or scientists in life on Earth.
......."



This is of course just a fraction of what other information
is available on the subject!

Cheers

Posted by: elreb Jun 14 2010, 01:44 PM

Tam,

Good show… as I find this conversation to be within my comfort zone. (The Science stuff)

Welcome to the “No Big Bang Zone”.

I find most of your answers “Enlightening”.

I’m very interested in your “Clouds of Darkness” and how they may or may not relate to “Black Planets”.

When light & other electromagnetic forces are absorbed, what happens next?

Are they given off as “Thermal Radiation”?

Also, if rays cannot collide; can they combine?

elreb

Posted by: elreb Jun 14 2010, 05:05 PM

Another thought:

A Star forms from a cloud of interstellar medium, mostly hydrogen, that has gathered to a point where the internal gas pressure is not strong enough to prevent or resist “ gravitational collapse” and whose birth is triggered by the shock wave from a supernovae.

Once a Star has converted all of its hydrogen (fuel) into “Iron” its lack of internal pressure cannot resist another round of gravitational collapse and it becomes the next supernovae. That remnant becomes either a “White planet” or a “Black planet”.

As a”Black planet” it will absorb light & any other electromagnetic radiations to the point that it’s mass will generate massive amounts of heat. This heat should (in theory) grow to a point where it will trigger some unknown event that connects it the bigger cycle. (Or recycle)

Lunk has coined this as a “Spore.

Posted by: lunk Jun 14 2010, 07:12 PM

Space and matter.

Matter is in space,
and there is much space,
within matter, too.

The closer one looks at things, the more space there is,
the farther one looks from things, the more space there is.

i'm pretty sure that the smallest part of a quark, we can discover,
will also contain lots of space,
as sure as the farthest galactic cluster, will, as well.

Space is therefore the container of all matter,
and if matter is made, it is made, through some process, in space.

This pretty much eventually leads to the conclusion,
that matter is made out of space.

...and so are we,
made of that same matter.




Spaced enough yet?

Posted by: elreb Jun 15 2010, 10:50 PM

This is a nice picture except for the big bang part.

Posted by: Tamborine man Jun 16 2010, 10:06 AM

elreb and Lunk,

this is a fascinating subject, and would love to rave on,
but bedtime is calling.
Am in a period of 10 hour working days plus traveling
time of 1 1/2 hours total on top of that each day, so
will see what i can fit in tomorrow!
(Have still not learn'd to 'ignore' "she who must be obeyed"!

Was hoping to expand on this subject in the 'Life after death'
thread later.
But perhaps it is better served in this thread. Will have to
think about that.

Lunk, don't ever forget about the 'ether' - will you!!

Elreb, there's no black planet or white planet.
Please don't 'believe' everything you're told.
Not even from me.
I'll just give you "food for thoughts" as Lunk do to me!

I want to bring in "the pistol star", so please look it up
if you don't already know the story; just so i know you
already know!

Cheers

Posted by: elreb Jun 16 2010, 12:36 PM

The following is a picture of a white planet, see arrow.




The following link talks a little about the “Dog Star” solar system and where intelligence came from 13,000 years ago. I do not agree with the Atlantis connection but “Aliens from Xylanthia” are a good start and puts us back into John Lear’s court.

http://xylanthia.com/

Earth is a “White Planet” and the result of the “No Big Bang Zone”. Planets do no grow out of thin air! It takes about 14 billion years to create a baby planet.

For the record: “Doggerland” was Atlantis. This goes back to Lunk’s expanding planet.

http://www.megalithic.co.uk/article.php?sid=2146412048

The United Kingdom was the higher ground and much older than Egypt.


It is just a coincidence that “Doggerland” and “Dog Star” match and that dog spelled backwards = god.

Canis is a genus of dogs, wolves and jackals and it was Cain who killed his brother Abel.

The Jackal headed god of afterlife was Anubis whose home town was Cynopolis (Greek for "city of the dog")

Anu was the sky god. I can go on and on. In fact “On” was the town of “Anu”. The word NEW is derived from “Anu”.

Posted by: elreb Jun 16 2010, 02:03 PM

The following picture is a “teaspoon of sand” in the Ocean of the Milky Way Galaxy.

In it’s center is the "Pistol Star".

Our Galaxy is a grain of sand in our Universe.

And we are the “Only humans”?


Posted by: lunk Jun 16 2010, 09:25 PM

Links to other threads
alluded to, or mentioned,
in this one:
(consider these, in the category of theory, conjecture, or works in progress,
...and possibly, a little off topic)


Alternate analysis of our universe.
Inside The Whole Black Sparkly Universe:
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=19284

Alternate analysis of geological history.
Plate Tectonics And Continental Drift:
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=12145

Alternate analysis...?
Life After Death!:
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=19879

Posted by: elreb Jun 16 2010, 10:56 PM

Lunk…

I get your point but how to you separate the guts?

Tnemelckram’s 10 dimensional “String Theory” observes that all things are connected.

Your…Lunk’s expanding planets & Black planet spores are connected.

JohnLears UFOs & Aliens are connected. Keep in mind that is was he who took this to outer-space.

Tamborine Man works well if he stays on Cosmology & Science.

Religion needs to be removed to another thread somewhere between L. Ron Hubbard and Robert A. Heinlein.

It’s up to you if you want to separate all this stuff. But how do you blend it back together?

Little did I know that the Xylanthia motherland was in Paia, Maui!

Posted by: Tamborine man Jun 17 2010, 09:42 AM

QUOTE (elreb @ Jun 15 2010, 01:56 AM) *
Lunk…

I get your point but how to you separate the guts?

Tnemelckram’s 10 dimensional “String Theory” observes that all things are connected.

Your…Lunk’s expanding planets & Black planet spores are connected.

JohnLears UFOs & Aliens are connected. Keep in mind that is was he who took this to outer-space.

Tamborine Man works well if he stays on Cosmology & Science.

Religion needs to be removed to another thread somewhere between L. Ron Hubbard and Robert A. Heinlein.

It’s up to you if you want to separate all this stuff. But how do you blend it back together?

Little did I know that the Xylanthia motherland was in Paia, Maui!



Elreb,
just to clear up your little misconception:

What we're talking about here, and in the 'Life after death' thread,
has absolutely nothing to do with 'religion', but everything to do
with what is facts.

Either we survive 'death' or we don't. It's as simple as that.
It's simply a question of either-or. Full stop.

If you're a sceptic or ardent atheist in this life, there's absolutely
no reason to believe that you would all of a sudden change your
views when you arrive in the transcendental world after this your
earthly life ends. You would still be a 'atheist' no doubt.
Catholics will still be catholics. Muslims will still be muslims. You
will still be you. Nothing much will change in this regard.

So no, elreb. It has nothing to do with you 'finding yourself sitting
on a white cloud playing the harp', or 'the seat on the right side of
god'.

We have long last moved on from this idiotic picture, and you owe
us the courtesy to consider us a little more mature and intelligent
than what your comment above implies.

Please don't take this the wrong way. I'm saying this with much love
and with only goodness in mind.

I'll bring up a new view of 'cosmology' in the 'Life after death' thread,
as this is where it really belongs.

Cheers

Posted by: elreb Jun 17 2010, 08:45 PM

Tam,

Truth is said to be the agreement of fact and reality.

I am a privately funded investigative researcher commissioned to “Boil Down” information and segregate truth, fact and reality from opinion.

Fundamentally, I am a ghost editor for other writers.

The bulk of this thread is opinion and nothing should be accepted as fact until it is fully analyzed by each member.

I could not give “Merit” to your opinion until the data is verified.

I am “Neither” a skeptic, atheist nor a mis-guided “Bible Thumper”.

On the one hand, you present yourself as a “No Big Banger”, yet do not appear to accept the fact that Stars evolve into Planets.

By you own admission, you are 3D and all humans came from the “Blue Planet”.

This view is extremely narrowed minded and can only be regarded as “Personal Belief” and not fact!

Elementary particles, stars, planets and all other 4D representations are related and have most of their foundation basics in common.

“You owe us the courtesy to consider us a little more mature and intelligence than what your comment above implies”!


Tam, I really do like you when you talk “Science”. But...

Who is “US”? Please forward “US” to your website!

Posted by: lunk Jun 18 2010, 08:45 AM

QUOTE (elreb @ Jun 17 2010, 05:45 PM) *
I am a privately funded investigative researcher commissioned to “Boil Down” information and segregate truth, fact and reality from opinion.

Elreb,
Mind if i volunteer the question,
does "Segregate truth, fact and reality from opinion",
pertaining to anything, or subject, that you have been asked to look into specifically?

Like, aviation, history, the cosmos, people, space-age technology, oil slicks, etc?

Posted by: elreb Jun 18 2010, 05:15 PM

Lunk,

“Pilots for Truth” is a hobby of mine and not a project.

I actually promote it and have ever since becoming a member. You will find this as a fact on one of my websites.

My client list is mostly into Western History but does include ancient history (egypt), mechanical engineering, auto mechanics, Income tax laws, and I also have several “Outer Space” projects in the works that are mostly fiction.

Note: We call it fiction only because it sells better than Reality…you know the “Dog Star” - Atlantis stuff!

I also edit Wikipedia every now and again.

I have gained much knowledge & insight from listening to you and Tnemelckram, much of which I was unaware of before and thank you both greatly.

This expanded wisdom will be included in future literally works.

It is an uphill battle fighting the forces of “Ignorance” and getting “Reality” on the table. I’m clueless why Tam wants to start a conflict?


Post Script:
John Lear did ask that we purchase a copy of Pari Spolter’s book “Gravitational Force of the Sun". This I did. I actually received a “Review Copy”. This book will be closely examined and if found to have merit, will receive my backing.

It is critical to understand that Pari’s greatest denouncers…never read the book but they cast the first stone.

Posted by: Tamborine man Jun 20 2010, 10:44 AM

QUOTE (elreb @ Jun 15 2010, 10:45 PM) *
Tam,

Truth is said to be the agreement of fact and reality.

I am a privately funded investigative researcher commissioned to “Boil Down” information and segregate truth, fact and reality from opinion.

Fundamentally, I am a ghost editor for other writers.

The bulk of this thread is opinion and nothing should be accepted as fact until it is fully analyzed by each member.

I could not give “Merit” to your opinion until the data is verified.

I am “Neither” a skeptic, atheist nor a mis-guided “Bible Thumper”.

On the one hand, you present yourself as a “No Big Banger”, yet do not appear to accept the fact that Stars evolve into Planets.

By you own admission, you are 3D and all humans came from the “Blue Planet”.

This view is extremely narrowed minded and can only be regarded as “Personal Belief” and not fact!

Elementary particles, stars, planets and all other 4D representations are related and have most of their foundation basics in common.

“You owe us the courtesy to consider us a little more mature and intelligence than what your comment above implies”!


Tam, I really do like you when you talk “Science”. But...

Who is “US”? Please forward “US” to your website!



Hi elreb,

it sounds as if you're thinking i was addressing you personally with regards
to being a skeptic or atheist or catholic or muslim etc., so i better make it
clear that it was meant to be understood only in general terms including all
of mankind in a universal context.
I should have used the word "one" instead of "you" which would have made
it much more clear, so i apologize for the misunderstanding i caused.

It is true that i don't except that stars (suns) "evolve" into planets, but i certainly
except the fact that most planets are offsprings of centre suns (stars) and which
they either directly or indirectly have been ejected or erupted from.

You wrote:
"By you own admission, you are 3D and all humans came from the “Blue Planet”. "

Actually i'm more of a 4D person than anything else, and i don't know what you
mean by "Blue Planet", so with your comment above you must mistake me for
someone else, i think!!

By 'us', i meant of course me and Lunk, and nobody else!

I just read that you are dealing with ancient egyptian history, so if you're also
interested in the Great Pyramid i hope you'll take a look at the drawings in the
'Life after death' thread, as i would be rather interested in your views of them?

Cheers

Posted by: elreb Jun 21 2010, 04:59 PM

Tam you had originally stated:

“The Earth is the ONLY planet in the universe, in our 3-dimensional world that is occupied with intelligent life”.

I got the term “Blue Planet” from the film produced by the IMAX Space Technology Corporation for the Smithsonian Institution's National Air and Space Museum, as well as Lockheed Corporation and filmed with the cooperation of NASA.

Partially filmed from orbit during space shuttle missions, the film is about the planet Earth.

In effect the Earth is the “Blue Planet”.

You also stated that:

“Every human-being survives 'death', and returns to his or her abode in the 4-dimensional 'transcendental' world”.

I have no problem with that as long as we separate “Realism” from Idealism”. The question beckoned is whether “Space” and “Time" are things, dimensions or something unknown?

It is my personal belief that the 4th dimension is "Time" which means you are still alive.

Now…that said…if you push up to the 5th dimension which I believe to be “Beyond Time”, then we could be on the same page.

But putting all that aside, I must now “Thank You”, as I have (due to this conversation) discovered a princess from Xylanthia who just happens to live on my Island.

I will indeed study on your “Great Pyramid”.

And…so what are your thoughts about the “Pistol Star” or Atlantis being “Doggerland”?

Posted by: Tamborine man Jun 21 2010, 10:23 PM

QUOTE (elreb @ Jun 19 2010, 07:59 PM) *
Tam you had originally stated:

“The Earth is the ONLY planet in the universe, in our 3-dimensional world that is occupied with intelligent life”.

I got the term “Blue Planet” from the film produced by the IMAX Space Technology Corporation for the Smithsonian Institution's National Air and Space Museum, as well as Lockheed Corporation and filmed with the cooperation of NASA.

Partially filmed from orbit during space shuttle missions, the film is about the planet Earth.

In effect the Earth is the “Blue Planet”.

You also stated that:

“Every human-being survives 'death', and returns to his or her abode in the 4-dimensional 'transcendental' world”.

I have no problem with that as long as we separate “Realism” from Idealism”. The question beckoned is whether “Space” and “Time" are things, dimensions or something unknown?

It is my personal belief that the 4th dimension is "Time" which means you are still alive.

Now…that said…if you push up to the 5th dimension which I believe to be “Beyond Time”, then we could be on the same page.

But putting all that aside, I must now “Thank You”, as I have (due to this conversation) discovered a princess from Xylanthia who just happens to live on my Island.

I will indeed study on your “Great Pyramid”.

And…so what are your thoughts about the “Pistol Star” or Atlantis being “Doggerland”?


Many thanks for your clarification,elreb.

Just a few comments:

Dimensions are solely determined by the size of particles. This goes also for the 4-dimension.

The concept of 'time' is absolute relative and therefore cannot be used within the confines of

"true reality"; which is really what we should be talking about when it comes to it.

Another thing is, that no human being can "die", and therefore all survives "death".
As human beings have been on this Earth for around 5 million years (4 million years as intelligent
beings), and have in this period continually produced new offsprings, the total number of human
beings in existence is more than staggering; it is beyond human imagination. No computer no matter
how big, will ever be able to calculate this number.
those human beings who no longer need to reincarnate on Earth are brought to Light worlds in a
higher dimension where Darkness cannot exist, far away from our 3-dimensional imperfect globe.

In a true sense one cannot separate realism (reality) from idealism (the ideal) as these terms are
inextricable connected. This fact can of course only become apparent in the moment true reality
is reached by the individual, where then realism and idealism melt together as one.

I will bring up the pistol star in the "life after death' thread, together with new knowledge about
'Atlantis', as well as an emotional incarnation account from this Island.

A'm looking much forward to your comments re. The Great Pyramid!

Cheers

Posted by: elreb Nov 3 2010, 06:46 PM

QUOTE (johnlear @ Aug 22 2009, 06:53 AM) *
My wife has been weary of me for 38 years. But I am sure you mean wary. smile.gif


Earthlings are often wary of Martians

We miss you John…please come back...


Posted by: johnlear Jan 6 2011, 12:01 PM

QUOTE (elreb @ Nov 1 2010, 08:46 PM) *
Earthlings are often wary of Martians

We miss you John…please come back...



A belated Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to you elreb and all my friends here a P4T

John Lear

Posted by: elreb Jan 6 2011, 12:36 PM

QUOTE (johnlear @ Jan 6 2011, 06:01 AM) *
A belated Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to you elreb and all my friends here a P4T

John Lear

Good morning Sir…elreb reporting for duty…

Well it is morning in Maui and about 70 degrees and clear skys…

Posted by: johnlear Jan 6 2011, 01:44 PM

QUOTE (elreb @ Jan 4 2011, 02:36 PM) *
Good morning Sir…elreb reporting for duty…

Well it is morning in Maui and about 70 degrees and clear skys…



Mo bettah......smile.gif

Posted by: elreb Jan 6 2011, 02:36 PM

QUOTE (johnlear @ Jan 6 2011, 07:44 AM) *
Mo bettah......smile.gif

Seeing as… we have both been around the world…I can’t help but love 80 degree weather and Sun shine almost all year long.

If you need snow or colder air you just hop over to the Big Island…

Our earthquakes and tsunamis are a joke…

Posted by: amazed! Jan 6 2011, 03:20 PM

Back atcha, John Lear. salute.gif

Posted by: Omega892R09 Jan 6 2011, 03:44 PM

QUOTE (lunk @ Jun 12 2010, 10:12 PM) *
This pretty much eventually leads to the conclusion,
that matter is made out of space.

...and so are we,
made of that same matter.




Spaced enough yet?

Yeah but!

The real problem is that the matter and energy (e=mc2) as we know it where matter is composed of nuclear particles and than in turn sub-nuclear particles only account for about 4 percent of what must constitute the total if gravitational forces are considered. The rest must be something else, hence dark matter and dark energy.

The universe is only expanding as galaxies and clusters of galaxies move apart. That is except for those galaxies which are being drawn together as the nearby Andromeda galaxy is being pulled in towards our 'milky way'. Andromeda will draw close before moving past our galaxy and then conducting a U-turn as it is finally pulled in and the galaxies collide.

The solar system tends not expand as local gravitational effects distort space time so as to keep the planets in orbit. Indeed it is Earth's gravity that tends to restrict the volumetric expansion of the Earth. Any small accretion of mass from particles falling to Earth will have a negligible impact and it must be considered the loss of mass as gases and particles from the surface are conducted into the upper atmosphere and drift away from the Earths gravitational field.

The Earth is round because of gravity. Asteroids lack the mass to form into near spherical objects and so remain irregularly shaped.

Posted by: Omega892R09 Jan 6 2011, 03:54 PM

QUOTE (lunk @ May 29 2010, 01:05 PM) *
This would mean that the moon is much closer to the Earth's weight,
than as it is presently measured.

Do not confuse mass and weight.

The more massive a body (plant, sun, galaxy) then the more will nearby objects weigh. But of course two bodies will exert a gravitational force on each other thus the centre of gravity of the Earth-moon system is within the Earth but way off centre. It also must move as the moon orbits the Earth. Much seismic activity is linked to the pull of the moon on the Earth as it orbits.

Gravity is some function of space and time neither of which form straight lines in the Euclidean sense.

Posted by: elreb Jan 6 2011, 04:44 PM

QUOTE (amazed! @ Jan 6 2011, 09:20 AM) *
Back atcha, John Lear. salute.gif

I’m with you Amazed and I was hoping not to scare Captain Lear off “Again” by talking space-time mumbo jumbo on this thread…

Posted by: johnlear Jan 6 2011, 05:44 PM

QUOTE (elreb @ Jan 4 2011, 06:44 PM) *
I’m with you Amazed and I was hoping not to scare Captain Lear off “Again” by talking space-time mumbo jumbo on this thread…


No problem.

There is no basis for Newton's assumption that gravitational force is due to and is proportional to the quantity or density of matter. The moon alleged gravity is based upon the alleged measurements of Apollo 15 and Newtons G=m1m2/r squared. But no Apollo flight ever went to the moon.

In fact we do not know what causes gravity but it is certainly not the quantity or density of matter.

Einsteins general and special theories are all incorrect because he assumed that gravity was caused by the quantity and density of matter.

Einstein said that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light which in incorrect. Here are 3 examples of things that travel faster than the speed of light ©:

Cerenkov radiation
Anti-mesons
Superluminal

The proof of Einsteins errors are found in the disproving of the 4 pillars upon which his theories are based:

The principal of equivalence
The gravitation Red Shift
The gravitational bending of light, and
Perihelion Rotation

All four of these pillars can be easily knocked down and disproved. (Pari Spolter 'Gravitational Force of the Sun' Orb Publishing, Granda Hills, CA).

We are told the gravitational force of the moon is one sixth that of earth and that number is based on the quantity and density of mass, the Earth assumed to be 5.5 gr.cm cubed and the moon 3.34 gr.cm cubed. All of this is pure nonsense.

If you use the Newton/Bullialdus Theory of Inverse Square, wherein you do not need to assume quantity or density of matter but only size, distance and neutral point 43,495 miles to figure 64% of Earths gravity. Arguing the point as a three body problem and figuring in the sun using the exact time of the alleged landing of Apollo 11 we find the moon's gravity to be 70% of earth's.

Neither can Einsteins theories explain

But humanity is consistently being dumbed down in the scientific field, an effort which began with Simon Newcomb's (a Navy Admiral and Director of the Naval Observatory in Washington, DC.) who traveled to Paris in 1870 to trash the decorated Danish Astronomer and Mathematician Peter Andreas Hansen for his dissertation in 1856 to the Royal Astronomical Society on the moon where Hansen proposed the possibility of life there.

My theory is sex, drugs and rock 'n roll will save the world.

John Lear

Posted by: elreb Jan 6 2011, 08:37 PM

QUOTE (johnlear @ Jan 6 2011, 11:44 AM) *
Pari Spolter 'Gravitational Force of the Sun' Orb Publishing, Granda Hills, CA

I have the book and agree with the both of you

Posted by: Omega892R09 Jan 7 2011, 07:58 AM

QUOTE (elreb @ Jun 16 2010, 08:15 PM) *
Post Script:
John Lear did ask that we purchase a copy of Pari Spolter’s book “Gravitational Force of the Sun". This I did. I actually received a “Review Copy”. This book will be closely examined and if found to have merit, will receive my backing.

It is critical to understand that Pari’s greatest denouncers…never read the book but they cast the first stone.

Huh! Too expensive!

Posted by: johnlear Jan 7 2011, 12:49 PM

QUOTE (elreb @ Jan 4 2011, 10:37 PM) *
I have the book and agree with the both of you


It comes down to this: Knowledge costs money; how informed do you want to be?

Posted by: elreb Jan 7 2011, 01:05 PM

QUOTE (johnlear @ Jan 7 2011, 06:49 AM) *
It comes down to this: Knowledge costs money; how informed do you want to be?

Back in the days of Plato, Socrates, Solon, Aristotle and others…education included philosophy, logic, ethics, and rhetoric, in addition to all the normal stuff.

Today people seem to live in small, compact boxes exclaiming they just do not have the time to understand.

Did you hear Bill O’Reilly claims that Ocean tides “can’t be explained” and thus prove that existence of god. O'Reilly goes on to explain to Mr. Silverman and his viewers that the magical cloud wizard causes the tides instead of the gravitational forces of the sun and moon.


Posted by: Omega892R09 Jan 8 2011, 02:13 PM

QUOTE (johnlear @ Jan 5 2011, 02:49 PM) *
It comes down to this: Knowledge costs money; how informed do you want to be?

Was that aimed at my 'too expensive' remark?

Yes I agree that knowledge costs money and is why I accepted a high price for a book on Oceanography.

A glance at my profile and interests will give a clue as to how spread my library is. Indeed SWMBO (she who must be obeyed) casts me something of a look each time a new book appears in the house. Thus I have to, at times, prioritise and considering my existing library (see below) 'Gravitational Forces of the Sun' does not look like good value. I will consider further.

I could discourse on many a topic including sailing warship architecture and its development, Victorian warship development and 'The Great Gunnery Scandal' of WW1 involving one Arthur Pollen. Other topics I could pick could be technological aspects of aviation such as X-Planes, aero engines (piston or gas turbine). In the mid 1960s I took Interavia every month and remember a very interesting article describing the speed regimes of gast turbines, ram-jets, pulse-jets, and scram-jets with various combinations of those - but that was before the Concord(e) power unit design had gelled and what an interesting achievement that was when completed. I wrote articles about the XB70 and rigid rotors, tubular section rotors with air ducted out of span-wise slots for helicopters. This later http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1967/1967%20-%200094.html provides information for those curious.

But I am also very interested in the science that underpins current thinking on the developmental history of the universe and where it may be going. I have been working my way through the works of Feynman (I am saving up for his Lectures on Physics seeing as public libraries over here no fail), Hawking and Penrose to name but a few.

But there are some things that don't seem to add up concerning the development of an anti-gravity force (or effect) in spite of having read Nick Cook's 'The Hunt for Zero Point' (shame there is no INDEX), in which the name Bill Lear figures so I guess that you as a descendant should have some idea of the true state of development here. But, if anti-gravity has been working a viable mechanism for the outstanding performance of aircraft such as the B2 Spirit then why are we still prating about with vectoring engine thrust for cutting edge military aircraft and still using helicopters to a large extent. And those are just a few of the myriad possibilities where ant-gravity could be a help in engineering projects.

As for UFOs. Well, I think there are many mundane explanations for most of the 'sightings' from weather and other (Skyhook) balloons driven at altitude by jetstreams, mirage reflections due to light refraction and reflection at atmospheric layer temperature boundaries, secret military aircraft particularly around Muroc/Edwards (I find the story behind that Muroc name interesting), and not forgetting out and out hoaxes.

Books for enlightenment are; Martin Gardner's 'Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science', Robert L Park's 'Voodoo Science: The Road from Foolishness to Fraud' and the currently pertinent work by Carl Sagan 'The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark' which should be on every school child's reading list, I read this soon after publication and a daughter presented me with a new copy just this Christmas - bless her - and so I have read it again.

I do hope that you take this in the spirit in which it is intended - open minded, scientific.

From one core to another: salute.gif cheers.gif

Posted by: Omega892R09 Jan 8 2011, 02:17 PM

QUOTE (johnlear @ Jan 4 2011, 07:44 PM) *
In fact we do not know what causes gravity but it is certainly not the quantity or density of matter.

I agree, but the quantity of matter in a body does have a proportional gravitational effect.

What gravity is at the deepest level dunno.gif .

Posted by: johnlear Jan 8 2011, 05:20 PM

quote name='Omega892R09' date='Jan 6 2011, 04:17 PM' post='10792931']
I agree, but the quantity of matter in a body does have a proportional gravitational effect.

What gravity is at the deepest level dunno.gif .
[/quote]


There are several planets and moons within our solar system which are hidden from us. If a 'body does have a proportional gravitational effect' then they would have perturbed the orbits of the other known planets.

Gravity, therefore, has not the slightest proportional gravitational effect.

Posted by: elreb Jan 8 2011, 06:03 PM

QUOTE (johnlear @ Jan 8 2011, 11:20 AM) *
There are several planets and moons within our solar system which are hidden from us. If a 'body does have a proportional gravitational effect' then they would have perturbed the orbits of the other known planets.

I also understand that several moons like Ganymede and Titan are actually larger than planets like Mercury.

Something they did not point out in High School…

More “Main Stream” education not teaching correctly…



Posted by: johnlear Jan 8 2011, 06:05 PM

QUOTE (Omega892R09 @ Jan 6 2011, 04:13 PM) *
Was that aimed at my 'too expensive' remark?


Yes.

QUOTE
Yes I agree that knowledge costs money and is why I accepted a high price for a book on Oceanography.


On a scale of 1 to 1000 one being what is in the public domain and 1000 being what is really in the ocean, the U.S. Navy/NASA/ knows only about 3.

Many of the remnants of prior civilizations are down there along with current ET bases.

Posted by: elreb Jan 8 2011, 06:20 PM

QUOTE (johnlear @ Jan 8 2011, 12:05 PM) *
Many of the remnants of prior civilizations are down there along with current ET bases.

I actually have a small library of over 1000 books with the most expensive costing more than $500.

Value is in the eye of the holder…

Posted by: johnlear Jan 8 2011, 07:03 PM

QUOTE (elreb @ Jan 6 2011, 08:20 PM) *
I actually have a small library of over 1000 books with the most expensive costing more than $500.

Value is in the eye of the holder…



Have you read any of them? What did you find out? smile.gif

Posted by: elreb Jan 8 2011, 07:25 PM

QUOTE (johnlear @ Jan 8 2011, 01:03 PM) *
Have you read any of them? What did you find out? smile.gif

Back in the old days, I was a code reader [building codes, IRS codes, contracts] and was conditioned to “Source” all data to discover its original intent. Then go out and explain what the code/law /regulation were trying to say.

Later on, I became a ghost editor for other writers, sourcing information before it went into print.

Not all source material is readily available so I would look for auctions and buy the original books. I still do this!

I discovered that writers and historians use their “artistic license” way too often.

What I found out…is to take nothing…at its word…and check things out for yourself.


http://www.josephrwalker.com/ some of my maps are original and cost $$$

Posted by: Omega892R09 Jan 9 2011, 08:29 AM

QUOTE (johnlear @ Jan 6 2011, 07:20 PM) *
There are several planets and moons within our solar system which are hidden from us. If a 'body does have a proportional gravitational effect' then they would have perturbed the orbits of the other known planets.

Gravity, therefore, has not the slightest proportional gravitational effect.

Was not the presence of once unknown solar objects detected by the perturbation of those already recognised?

EDIT; and the presence of black holes and other massive but unseen objects in the deep sky are also deduced by the perturbations of nearby visible stars. Indeed, it is considered that most stars are binaries, some made up of of more than two objects, with each having an effect on the other.

Galaxies too have a gravitational effect on other galaxies as I indicated with my mention of the nearby Andromeda galaxy being pulled in by ours.

Sure, energy (and by extension dark energy) has a gravitational effect, well described by Penrose and Hawking, an effect which is certain to be proportional to the amount of energy. Similarly for mass which is an alternative manifestation of energy.

To say that gravity is not proportional to mass is rather like saying that the amount of light reaching the film plane in a camera is not proportional to the aperture simply because it is proportional to the time of exposure. And there we introduce photons which have interesting properties WRT exchange of mass and energy. Photons being energy and hence having some gravitational properties.

Posted by: lunk Jan 9 2011, 09:37 AM

QUOTE (johnlear @ Jan 8 2011, 01:20 PM) *
quote name='Omega892R09' date='Jan 6 2011, 04:17 PM' post='10792931']
I agree, but the quantity of matter in a body does have a proportional gravitational effect.

What gravity is at the deepest level dunno.gif .



There are several planets and moons within our solar system which are hidden from us. If a 'body does have a proportional gravitational effect' then they would have perturbed the orbits of the other known planets.

Gravity, therefore, has not the slightest proportional gravitational effect.


Hi John,

Gravity...
hmmm, yes i've been thinking about this quite a lot, lately.

Mass must exist without weight and gravity at every point, within the universe,
but mass needs, matter to show itself, as a center of gravity, which is...
...a point,
at the center of gravity, of that volume of matter. (star, planet, moon, atom)
So, mass at any point in empty space, without a volume of matter, would have no inertia, and it would be undetectable.
Even if that point contained, all the mass of the universe,
as it has no volume, it can have no detectable center of gravity,
and no direct effect on the matter of volume, in the universe.

This gives rise to the old idea of the aether, which, i think, is renamed the dark matter, of today.
Point particles of no practical volume, but containing mass.
This would be the pre-matter of the universe,
the building block of the neutron and the proton,
and thus, all the matter and energy of the universe.

We live in an ocean of pre-matter, we can't see it, or detect it.
In its purest form it is empty vacuous outer space.

This ocean of pre-matter-particles pours constantly into the center of the volumes of matter, that floats within it.
We can't see the flow of inertia free, frictionless, infinitely compressible, empty space into matter,
but we can see how the matter "floating" in space, behaves.
We see this as weight or gravity to matter.

So gravity could be seen to be caused by the suction, from the dark matter of space,
constantly draining into the centers of gravity of diameters of volumes of matter.

...i don't think this will be found in any book, yet.

What are your thoughts?

Posted by: BarryWilliamsmb Jan 9 2011, 05:27 PM

Wow! What an excellent description of time!

Hopefully one day we'll understand as much about this as we now do about dragons.

Posted by: BarryWilliamsmb Jan 9 2011, 05:33 PM

QUOTE (johnlear @ Jan 4 2011, 08:44 PM) *
My theory is sex, drugs and rock 'n roll will save the world.

John Lear


Sir, you are not only wise but smart, too. I salute you!

Posted by: elreb Jan 9 2011, 06:43 PM

QUOTE (BarryWilliamsmb @ Jan 9 2011, 11:27 AM) *
Hopefully one day we'll understand as much about time as we now do about dragons.

Who on time...Lunk?

Posted by: elreb Jan 9 2011, 06:45 PM

QUOTE (BarryWilliamsmb @ Jan 9 2011, 11:27 AM) *
Hopefully one day we'll understand as much about this as we now do about dragons.

So you have been reading "Dragon blood"?

Posted by: johnlear Jan 10 2011, 12:40 AM

QUOTE (Omega892R09 @ Jan 7 2011, 11:29 AM) *
Was not the presence of once unknown solar objects detected by the perturbation of those already recognised?


Yes, for now known planets inside the solar and predicted for outside the solar system.

But nobody has predicted or knows about the hidden planets inside our solar system. They are huge but have no mass.

Posted by: Omega892R09 Jan 10 2011, 07:09 AM

QUOTE (johnlear @ Jan 8 2011, 03:40 AM) *
Yes, for now known planets inside the solar and predicted for outside the solar system.

But nobody has predicted or knows about the hidden planets inside our solar system. They are huge but have no mass.

Ah! Planets, but not as we know them. whistle.gif

Posted by: lunk Jan 10 2011, 08:42 AM

We cannot see what we cannot detect.
All that appears is empty space.
And we only can see a narrow spectrum of electromagnetic radiation.

Time, that's a kicker.

The only place we exist is, in the moment,
The past is unchangeable, and the future is a probability,
but the moment is always present.
So one must ask if time even exists.

However, we also know any duration of time (like space) is dividable to infinity.
making the shortest duration of time as zero.
Which is interesting, because there would be no time, in a single moment,
for anything at all, to happen.
A universe where nothing ever happens, static,
to all the activity that is happening in ours.

Ah, but space as a super-fluid gas, would cause different densities, as it is pulled into the matter suspended within it. And the rate of time, should slow in the space closer, to a center of gravity, this exponentially increases the space available, closer to a center of gravity.

We see this as a general increase in the density in matter, towards a center of gravity.

The atmosphere of Earth, has part of this same increment in air pressure towards sea level.

This is one of the reasons planes can't fly as fast, close to the ground, as at a higher altitude, i think.

Posted by: patrouille Jan 10 2011, 12:07 PM

All the best to all of you... and a big smile of recognition to John Lear for:
"My wife has been weary of me for 38 years. But I am sure you mean wary."

--Adam "Dewpoint" Shaw
www.captens.fr

Posted by: johnlear Jan 10 2011, 01:28 PM

QUOTE (patrouille @ Jan 8 2011, 03:07 PM) *
All the best to all of you... and a big smile of recognition to John Lear for:
"My wife has been weary of me for 38 years. But I am sure you mean wary."

--Adam "Dewpoint" Shaw
www.captens.fr



No, weary as in "Omigod, how am I going to clean up this mess."

But she is also 'wary' as in: "Omigod, what is he going to do next."

Posted by: johnlear Jan 10 2011, 01:39 PM

A few thoughts:

There was no big bang.

There will be no 'contraction'.

There was no beginning and there will be no end.

The universe contains billions and billions and billions of galaxies.

There are a billion times a billion earths similar to ours. Some are more advanced, some are less advanced.

The speed of thought is infinite.

The speed of gravity is instantaneous through out the universe.

There is one black hole for every galaxy.

A black holes purpose is to recycle stars after they die.

There is no such thing as 'Dark Matter'.

We are not an experiment.


John Lear

Posted by: elreb Jan 10 2011, 02:17 PM

QUOTE (johnlear @ Jan 10 2011, 07:39 AM) *
A few thoughts:There was no big bang.There will be no 'contraction'.There was no beginning and there will be no end.The universe contains billions and billions and billions of galaxies.There are a billion times a billion earths similar to ours. Some are more advanced, some are less advanced.The speed of thought is infinite.The speed of gravity is instantaneous through out the universe.There is one black hole for every galaxy.A black holes purpose is to recycle stars after they die.There is no such thing as 'Dark Matter'.We are not an experiment.John Lear

Now we are getting somewhere...I suppose I can quote you on that on elreb.com?

Posted by: lunk Jan 10 2011, 04:38 PM

QUOTE (johnlear @ Jan 10 2011, 09:39 AM) *
A few thoughts:

There was no big bang.

l. True.
QUOTE (johnlear @ Jan 10 2011, 09:39 AM) *
There will be no 'contraction'.

l. True
QUOTE (johnlear @ Jan 10 2011, 09:39 AM) *
There was no beginning and there will be no end.

l. True
QUOTE (johnlear @ Jan 10 2011, 09:39 AM) *
The universe contains billions and billions and billions of galaxies.

l. True (at least, if not more)
QUOTE (johnlear @ Jan 10 2011, 09:39 AM) *
There are a billion times a billion earths similar to ours. Some are more advanced, some are less advanced.

l. More than likely.
QUOTE (johnlear @ Jan 10 2011, 09:39 AM) *
The speed of thought is infinite.

l. i don't know, but i would say intuition happens pretty quick.
QUOTE (johnlear @ Jan 10 2011, 09:39 AM) *
The speed of gravity is instantaneous through out the universe.

l. hmmm, i'd say that the vacuum of space is a constant.
QUOTE (johnlear @ Jan 10 2011, 09:39 AM) *
There is one black hole for every galaxy.

l. yes, a galaxy scale black hole, a sort of nucleus.
QUOTE (johnlear @ Jan 10 2011, 09:39 AM) *
A black holes purpose is to recycle stars after they die.

l. Perhaps, but i'm not sure if this could be called a "purpose."
QUOTE (johnlear @ Jan 10 2011, 09:39 AM) *
There is no such thing as 'Dark Matter'.

l. Er, yes, because it is undetectable, and we see it as nothing.
QUOTE (johnlear @ Jan 10 2011, 09:39 AM) *
We are not an experiment.

l. ...but are the experimenters?

i don't know from where you drew your conclusions John,
but they are very similar to mine.
i see another Renaissance coming to science,
hopefully very soon.

i do see a pattern in the solar system, though,
Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Asteroid belt,
Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, Kuiper belt.
Perhaps there are 4, even more massive bodies beyond, before the Oort cloud?

Yet all, is matter suspended in space, drawing in the points,
in our universe of boundless volume.

Posted by: elreb Jan 10 2011, 05:11 PM

This looks like my office...


Posted by: rob balsamo Jan 10 2011, 05:33 PM

Always good to see you on the forum John.

Hope you're doing well my friend.

Posted by: johnlear Jan 10 2011, 06:26 PM

QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Jan 8 2011, 08:33 PM) *
Always good to see you on the forum John.

Hope you're doing well my friend.



Thanks Bob, all is well.

Happy New Year. smile.gif

Posted by: johnlear Jan 10 2011, 06:32 PM

QUOTE (elreb @ Jan 8 2011, 08:11 PM) *
This looks like my office...



And here is how it looks this afternoon. Gadzooks what a mess:

http://img7.imageshack.us/i/denjan102011b.jpg/

Uploaded with http://imageshack.us

Posted by: elreb Jan 10 2011, 07:06 PM

I have a funny feeling you do not move around as much as I do.

I have always been a monitor freak [like you] and needed from 4 to 7 of them when I was writing and publishing. We had built a consol that reminded you of NASA with computer junk everywhere.

Most of this crap is still in a warehouse in Sacramento rotting away along with another 1000 books and two Corvette engines.

Cancer killed me over 10 years ago [non Hodgkin’s lymphoma] and I actually live in the 5th dimension.

My “Ba” was most important because it contained my thoughts when I was alive…more or less my intellectual DNA.
My “Ka” was simply the aspect of being alive and moved on when my organic body died.

My “Ba” is now in limbo until it founds a fresh “Ka” of the next LIFE

I just completed my second LIFE which was "the Life which was no Life"

Today is my birthday…I would have been 93y today.

Posted by: BarryWilliamsmb Jan 10 2011, 07:32 PM

QUOTE (elreb @ Jun 9 2010, 07:44 PM) *
In one hand, I also see “Time” as being relative and man-made.

In the other hand I hold an Apple seed.

I plant the apparent 3D seed in the ground and water it, then its 4D tree time begins & its 3D seed time ends.

The 4D tree grows, produces Apples and dies. I cut up the Tree and make it into 3D furniture.

I eat the Apple and spit out the seeds into my 4D hand.

So you have the time of the person, the time of the seed, the time of the tree, the time of the apple and the time of the chair.

Is the “rest time” of the seed or the “rest time” of the chair considered as time?

Is the seed really dead or just dormant? Duration should be considered as a dimension.


Sorry Elreb - I was referring to your post from last June. Your thoughts provided a lively dinner conversation at my house.

Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)