We'll find out in a few minutes. The Discovery Channel is launching a new special: UFO's Declassified: Live.
It airs now. Don't miss it! 😱
It airs now. Don't miss it! 😱
Watch this video. It completely disagrees with some things and some premises I've previously said, but still I can't NOT take its premise seriously. Check it out.
The Truth Behind the Super Hornet UFO Encounters - YouTube
The Truth Behind the Super Hornet UFO Encounters - YouTube
Maybe practice being a little less patronizing if you expect people to indulge your needles
There was a non-rhetorical question asked just prior. Scott asked it first, and you danced around it. I repeated it, and you danced around it. It remains unanswered, though I knew the reference I made would "get them out on the floor."
Also, it's true Sir Isaac practiced alchemy. Refer to my post re: all knowledge is contextual.
Newton worked within his (17th century) context, but also changed that context as few have done before or since.
@ Brinkman
Don't get stuck on the peripheral stuff. I think the author of my link has a point that it's possible we're much farther along than thought. It's also possible that some of this stuff implied as extraterrestrial tech is being seeded to obfuscate 21st century developments. I'm not saying that other sightings earlier weren't extraterrestrial in origin. I'm only saying that we may have caught up and it has now been figured out that it may be better now to blame recent sighting of UFOs as extraterrestrial in origin to cover it up. I think he has a point in saying that the really black project stuff is often hidden behind stuff that is also black, but not "as" black. Such as knowledge of extraterrestrial UFOs.
I'm thinking it would fit in that they finally acknowledge the possible existence of extraterrestrial UFOs to divert attention away from still more secret projects by the government.
Don't get stuck on the peripheral stuff. I think the author of my link has a point that it's possible we're much farther along than thought. It's also possible that some of this stuff implied as extraterrestrial tech is being seeded to obfuscate 21st century developments. I'm not saying that other sightings earlier weren't extraterrestrial in origin. I'm only saying that we may have caught up and it has now been figured out that it may be better now to blame recent sighting of UFOs as extraterrestrial in origin to cover it up. I think he has a point in saying that the really black project stuff is often hidden behind stuff that is also black, but not "as" black. Such as knowledge of extraterrestrial UFOs.
I'm thinking it would fit in that they finally acknowledge the possible existence of extraterrestrial UFOs to divert attention away from still more secret projects by the government.
Last edited:
I answered it already then:
The merits of alchemy aside, it was no more unscientific in the 17th century than it is now and what Newton got out of practicing it was his business. I do not consider it a “flaw” to his intellect.
I might have to get this book out from the library, it seems like an interesting read.
The American Obsession With Conspiracy Theories, Explained | The New Republic
The American Obsession With Conspiracy Theories, Explained | The New Republic
I'm skeptical that you don't know the difference between "here" and "there."
I'm not sure what you mean. Can we substitute "bloodletting" for "alchemy," or are you simply disagreeing that "all knowledge is contextual"?
@AFA
I just read the article. He's oversimplifying and conflating a certain kind of thought with a radical right conspiratorial political ideology. I'm as far from a typical "birther" or other far right ideology as you can get. And I'm definitely not a nativist, populist or any other of those FOX influenced people. I mostly despise them. I know we shouldn't be political but that article tarred me with a VERY broad brush that just does not apply.
I realize that not being a resident of this country you might not know the article has this wrong.
I just read the article. He's oversimplifying and conflating a certain kind of thought with a radical right conspiratorial political ideology. I'm as far from a typical "birther" or other far right ideology as you can get. And I'm definitely not a nativist, populist or any other of those FOX influenced people. I mostly despise them. I know we shouldn't be political but that article tarred me with a VERY broad brush that just does not apply.
I realize that not being a resident of this country you might not know the article has this wrong.
Last edited:
I see why you’re confused now. Scott was begging the question that I posted the Tyson tweet as an argument against people posting here. As I made clear, I posted it as an example of how one of the most widely recognized public skeptics obfuscates issues in bad faith. To repeat an axiom, if it’s not about you, it’s not about you.
Not sure what you’re saying here. Failing to turn lead into gold shouldn’t have been any less obvious 400 years ago than it is now.
Does anybody here actually believes our next gen fighter can go 13000mph and able to pull 100G? I got a bridge to sell you.
It was "about me" only to the extent that I was curious about your answer.
I've no particular fondness for NdT, but the widely recognized public skeptic that preceded him left him big shoes to fill.
Chemistry was a newborn infant in Newton's day. Meaning it was less obvious.
Much the same with medicine, which is why I mentioned bloodletting.
Give me a break. This is just empirical chauvinism trying to recontextualize history. Again, failing to turn lead into gold should have been plainly obvious 400 years ago. The Japanese had no problem refining steel into low-carbon katanas centuries before. Give the English some credit (but not much more, lol).
I gave you a link with several more recent examples; for instance, Albert Einstein was endorsing psychics as late as 1932.
Last edited:
All of this still dancing around and shifting discussion into peripheral matters.
Who cares about Alchemy or bloodletting or how to teach dogs Ballet dancing?
WHERE-IS-SOLID-PROOF-OF-EXISTING-ALIEN-SHIPS?
The still unanswered question.
Who cares about Alchemy or bloodletting or how to teach dogs Ballet dancing?
WHERE-IS-SOLID-PROOF-OF-EXISTING-ALIEN-SHIPS?
The still unanswered question.
The fruits of the Manhattan Project were many; some damning and some promising. It was a paradigm shift and it happened in complete secrecy, including secret from the US President. Given the trillions of USD that have been spirited away to deep black projects, I do not think it entirely implausible that another major paradigm shift may have occurred in more or less the same secrecy. The rest of us (in the US at least) are still using combustion engines and rely on an electric grid fueled by coal, this many years after nuclear energy and even the development of non-fissilble molten salt reactors.
If we’re still pumping oil out of the ground for combustion engines, it wouldn’t surprise me if we were still using obsolete jet fighters when much more advanced tech was being developed in complete secrecy.
Last edited: