Skipjack wrote:My problem is that people observe (or think they observe) something that they can (at the time) not explain and then jump to conclusions.
That happens all the time. Aces just did this. he saw a grainy vid and decided it must be ice particles, with no information concerning the speed, distance or size of the object in question.
Now lets talk about the cases where people did NOT jump to any conclusions. take the case of Ray Bowyer flying over the English Channel in 2007. He sighted a pair of craft he estimated to be a mile long and watched them for 15 minutes. All the passengers in his plane likewise saw these objects, as did the pilot of a second aircraft 25 miles away and as did radar. As per usual, the craft departed with an almost instantaneous acceleration that cannot be explained by known modes of transport.
See it really doesn't matter how many generalities you can cast about and how much character assassination you provide. The evidence is clear to anyone who is open to view it. So let me ask, out of all the detractors found here: Aces, Skippy, Jded, polyill, Betruger--how many of you have ever done anything resembling a serious investigation of the evidence? How many of you have read even a single book on the subject? And in light of the obvious answer, let me ask you, Skippy, just who is it that is jumping to conclusions?
Ron:
Just to update you on the requirements for initiating a 10m OD warp field, Sonny White's latest paper and presentation at the following NASA server shows that we don't need a Jupiter load of inertially exotic mass to initiate it as Alcubbierre’s original metric first indicated. If we are willing to make the toroidal warp field thickness thicker than a few microns and increase it to say a meter, the exotic inertial mass requirement goes down by the same orders of magnitude. And if you are really brave, having the warp field generator oscillate the warp field at high-frequencies (GHz) this feature will decrease the required exotic matter requirements down to levels measured in just a few metric tons of exotic inertial mass dependent on the required effective transport velocity of the warp bubble, i.e. 10c 100c, etc. And it appears that is a feat that one or more groups of folks have already figured out how to do and have demonstrated in our skies, no matter what their origins may be...
I'm not jumping to any conclusions except from your record of behavior in what's supposed to be proper dialog on this here forum. Here and at NSF. Or maybe you can show me where I asserted anything beyond the above grainy vid.
Take the F-in general UFO talk out of this ME thread.
"Must" be warp drive... Dixit some puny homo sapiens that's never been off this planet, talking like he knows the System of the Universe like the back of his hand. It "must" be that one thing like it "must" be any other thing we don't even have an inkling of yet.
We don't even have a definitive demonstration of ME-like propulsion yet (levitate a teapot into a conference and make it circle a scale model of Saturn), and you're insisting some non-mundane phenomena you haven't witnessed yourself to satisfy empirical minimums is somehow undoubtedly ME-propelled.
Last edited by Betruger on Tue Aug 21, 2012 4:14 am, edited 1 time in total.
You can do anything you want with laws except make Americans obey them. | What I want to do is to look up S. . . . I call him the Schadenfreudean Man.
Even if ME is "real" and we end up using it, where is the evidence that these ETs are using ME and not some other propulsion formula that's consistent with the (for argument's sake) demonstrated performance?
You are making leaps and bounds to support your pet favorite. Your faith in ME trumps your skeptical integrity.
You can do anything you want with laws except make Americans obey them. | What I want to do is to look up S. . . . I call him the Schadenfreudean Man.
You're putting words in my mouth. I never said what you're attributing to me.
What I said was:
". . .all warp craft fly on a time-like geodesic, so passengers and the craft do not experience inertia of any sort. They all experience weightlessness. This is the kind of inertia nulling necessary to perform the kinds of aerial stunts reported over the decades of modern flight. Furthermore, this kind of inertia nulling is the only kind proposed I'm aware of, meaning there haven't been any other theories about how to null inertia to the point one could fly these crazy right angles in the sky. The observation illustrates what warp can do, and the theory behind warp exclusively explains the observation."
and ". . .M-E physics is what is required for a "space drive" as defined by Marc Millis during the Breakthrough Propulsion Physics Project--basically a propellantless inertial thruster. It's also what is required for generating large quantities of negative mass with negative inertia, which is what is required for warp and wormhole construction."
If you took those statements as arguments that M-E physics must be correct you were jumping to conclusions.
It is true that the only way we know of to construct a wormhole generator or a warp drive is to use negative mass with negative inertia, and that M-E theory tell us how to generate such exotic matter. No one claimed there is only one such way to generate exotic matter. Point is, we only know of this one way.
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis
skep-tic [skep-tik]
noun
a person who questions the validity or authenticity of something purporting to be factual.
Skepticism is not faith and its not being stubborn, it's a healthy position on incredible claims that lack evidence. I'm sorry GIT, as much as I enjoy the occassional update and conversation, either way, you do not get to apply your own meanings. God I feel like I've become Kiteman....
Scott, not to put too fine a point on it, but there is nothing healthy about skepticism. If you want to apply some vulgar meaning and then say there's no trouble, fine, have at. In philosophy as well as in history, what entails a skeptic has a very specific meaning and it is not a healthy nor rational position.
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis
paulmarch wrote:
Just to update you on the requirements for initiating a 10m OD warp field, Sonny White's latest paper and presentation at the following NASA server shows that we don't need a Jupiter load of inertially exotic mass to initiate it as Alcubbierre’s original metric first indicated. If we are willing to make the toroidal warp field thickness thicker than a few microns and increase it to say a meter, the exotic inertial mass requirement goes down by the same orders of magnitude. And if you are really brave, having the warp field generator oscillate the warp field at high-frequencies (GHz) this feature will decrease the required exotic matter requirements down to levels measured in just a few metric tons of exotic inertial mass dependent on the required effective transport velocity of the warp bubble, i.e. 10c 100c, etc. And it appears that is a feat that one or more groups of folks have already figured out how to do and have demonstrated in our skies, no matter what their origins may be...
GIThruster wrote:he saw a grainy vid and decided it must be ice particles, with no information concerning the speed, distance or size of the object in question.
no, I said its probably ice particles.
GIThruster wrote:
AcesHigh wrote:. . .where is your questioning about Diogenes thinking its something "controlled" and evidence of UFO?
Diogenes didn't say that. What Diogenes said was "it appears that an object moving through the missile's flight path moved out of the way just prior to the missile going through that region of space. . .If there is another explanation for what occurred in this video I have not heard it."
and he is reporting correctly. It DOES appear that something that was moving across the screen moved out of the path of the missile that blasts through. He hasn't committed to a position. He's just stating the facts. Even though I would have a dozen questions to start, I have to admit, it does appear the thing changed direction to get out of the way of the oncoming missile. That's the APPEARANCE of the thing.
1 - Diogenes said "why don't we discuss a bit of evidence". Thus, he thinks its evidence for alien craft, otherwise he wouldnt post it in the middle of the UFO discussion. He didnt post it simply because he wanted to state the fact that an object that maybe is near, maybe far, apparently changed its position for any reason.
2 - he then states what happens in the video, but says the objetc changed position prior to the missile going through that region of space. I see no evidence of anything like that, except an object changing position.
3 - in the end of his post he says "An object changing direction in space would seem pretty good evidence that it is under some sort of control."
it seems you carefully forgot to point his jumping to conclusions there. He jumped to more conclusions there than when I said that it was PROBABLY an ice particle being deflected by the thruster.
paulmarch wrote:Just to update you on the requirements for initiating a 10m OD warp field, Sonny White's latest paper and presentation at the following NASA server shows that we don't need a Jupiter load of inertially exotic mass to initiate it as Alcubbierre’s original metric first indicated. If we are willing to make the toroidal warp field thickness thicker than a few microns and increase it to say a meter, the exotic inertial mass requirement goes down by the same orders of magnitude. And if you are really brave, having the warp field generator oscillate the warp field at high-frequencies (GHz) this feature will decrease the required exotic matter requirements down to levels measured in just a few metric tons of exotic inertial mass dependent on the required effective transport velocity of the warp bubble, i.e. 10c 100c, etc. And it appears that is a feat that one or more groups of folks have already figured out how to do and have demonstrated in our skies, no matter what their origins may be...
How high can the boost "easily" go before requirements ratchet up to wormhole levels? A boost of 1000-10,000 would be most convenient, versus the cited 100. Tho yes, I'm looking a gift-horse in the mouth.
303 wrote:lets start off by assuming it wasnt a missile , or a adrenaline-junkie alien with a badly cloaked ship
My recollection is that it was an announced missile test. The reason the Astronauts had trained their camera on this section of space was in an effort to see it. This is how I recall this being covered by ABC News.
If you have information which contradicts this, put it forth.
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —
Diogenes wrote:
An object changing direction in space would seem pretty good evidence that it is under some sort of control.
probably an ice particle having its direction changed by the shuttle thrusters.
Were that true, it would not have been noted by the astronaut who was aiming the camera, and it would not have ended up on ABC World News right after it happened. This video aired on a Major news network and no one had such an explanation at that time.
It was presented as a strange anomaly, and that according to the opinion of the Astronauts filming it.
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —
AcesHigh wrote:
says the most childish person on these forums.
You bear that distinction in my mind. Since your very first message, I thought of you as an idiot, and you have done little to convince me otherwise since.
AcesHigh wrote:
I see lots of angry republicans blaming everything on democrats here... quite funny...
for example, they blame Kennedy on the Bay of Pigs affair, but forget that the Cuban Revolution only happened because of US support and backing to Fulgencio Batista, specially dureing Eisenhower´s term.
Yup. A Blithering idiot.
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —
Diogenes wrote:
An object changing direction in space would seem pretty good evidence that it is under some sort of control.
probably an ice particle having its direction changed by the shuttle thrusters.
Were that true, it would not have been noted by the astronaut who was aiming the camera, and it would not have ended up on ABC World News right after it happened. This video aired on a Major news network and no one had such an explanation at that time.
It was presented as a strange anomaly, and that according to the opinion of the Astronauts filming it.
the video you posted has no info at all about the mission, what astronauts were involved, nothing. Can you please provide more info so we can research about the incident? Surely from that video alone, the explanation of it being an ice particle is more probable than anything else.
more info, from NASA, showing that the object was far away, would be better evidence. Havent had luck with Google search and the Youtube video has no info at all in the description.
anyway, do you guys believe in conspiracy theories to hide the fact aliens (or future humans more probably, considering the very humanoid and clearly ape descendent form of most reporter aliens, who look very much like human fetuses actually) visit us constantly?
Last edited by AcesHigh on Tue Aug 21, 2012 2:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
