Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.

# All Activity

1. Past hour
2. ## DA: Derailers Anonymous Thread II

Good night!! And I am afraid I am next on this list; have to be up early to take my van to the dealership. Have a good night/day everyone!

4. ## Mathematically proven Overunity mechanism

Counterweight only allows control of the torque on the shaft, and thus the acceleration and velocity of the turning of the shaft. It does not generate energy, it only helps determine how fast the energy is moved.
5. ## Can science prove or disprove "God"?

With those experiences being personal it's outside the scope, as such irrelevant to anyone else but the individual.
6. ## DA: Derailers Anonymous Thread II

Goodnight see you tomorrow
7. ## Gun Control ?

The 'Far Left Progressive Utopia' is only a matter of time. The age of conservatism is dying out, whether you like it or not. What we have now is simply a momentary reactionary response to an inevitability. http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/09/25/the-gops-millennial-problem-runs-deep/ Buckle up buttercup. Your old fuddy-duddy ways are all ancient history. The future of Social Democracy is already here.
8. ## Mathematically proven Overunity mechanism

I've outlined the flaws several times, and each time you say your formulas show such not to be true, and post a video of you swinging a lever around like a highschool cheerleader. You state the problem in your logic right there.... "...but I , without, engineering background,was confident that ball will...". You are confident, but haven't shown a single reason to be confident. Build a solid structure. Mount your device onto it. Create a method to remote activate the device (a string probably would do). And then make a video showing the device swiinging from the initial position to the capture position. AND, then show it going back to the original position when it is released a second time. This will have to work in both directions to be feasible at all. Then if by some miracle that does work. Take a very small motor, and mount it to the shaft the lever swings on. Mount it solidly so it can turn with the shaft, or so that it has a gear/wheel that is tight with the shaft and turns with it. Then attach that motor to a very weak light source. Maybe a tiny diode. Then repeat your previous experiment by releasing the device so it swings one way and then back the other way. See if the tiny amount of electricity created by the motor lights up the diode. You can use as weak a motor/generator as you like, but the drag it causes (even to light a tiny diode) will cause the device to fail to reach your locking position. This will then be proof there is no Over Unity. If by some method, you do get the device to lock back ever time, and you light the diode, then by ALL MEANS go get a patent and begin working on selling it to the energy industry.
9. ## DA: Derailers Anonymous Thread II

I personally like the theme song to Phantom of the Opera (the movie). Good night!
10. ## Can science prove or disprove "God"?

Yes, I’m aware of the “God of the gaps” argument, which gets us nowhere IMO. My point was that, generally speaking, it shouldn’t be overstated what evidence science provides as a counter to the wholly subjective and therefore scientifically unverifiable evidence of believers. That doesn’t help progress the discussion either IMO. cormac
11. ## DA: Derailers Anonymous Thread II

Hanging out with mummies two days straight has worn me out. I'm going to bed...and will probably dream of mummies. Goodnight, friends!
12. ## Can science prove or disprove "God"?

But jesus also said he is not going to change the word of God, and that it will be God's world when the final battle is over, so how does that not insist that the current covenant is a temporary situation and that God, Will go back to genocide and smiting people after the new order has been established?
13. ## Bigfoot ....surviving remnant

There has been plenty of hunters and trackers who reported seeing, hearing, or finding footprints and other "evidence" of Bigfoot, and were summarily dismissed. Generally dismissing such is the first reaction they receive. I read a article a while back, I think it was three, or four years ago, about a state, Minnesota, I think, that underestimated the number of bears in the state. It seems they did several representative studies of a few areas and then extrapolated the data state wide. However it seems that when they did it again the next year that the population of bears appeared to have doubled. My point being that the knowledge of the populations, even of large animals, and the food sources of those animals, are subject to great variability and are at best educated guesses. Still, you are right in that a body should have been found by now.
14. ## DA: Derailers Anonymous Thread II

Ever listened to music so good it makes you teary-eyed? This did this to me just now:
15. ## DA: Derailers Anonymous Thread II

The oysters is where you lose me there. Yuck. Can't stand that stuff...
16. ## DA: Derailers Anonymous Thread II

Lol keep it for now, I know theres creeps who need to be yelled at. Elsewhere I mean
17. ## DA: Derailers Anonymous Thread II

I like all kinds of fresh water fish, enjoy lobster, kinda like crab. For the life of me I don't understand why I don't like shrimp and I've had it almost any way you can cook it. I also do not enjoy mussels, although I love steamed clams. Never been brave enough to try oysters, they looks just throw me off.
18. ## Peruvian Mummies: ETs or Humans?

And your indignation is phony and contrived. But when you have nothing else, at least you have that, right?
19. ## Can science prove or disprove "God"?

That's exactly where I was going some misconstrue that to initiate the God of the gaps, argument. I like the jesus on South park, not sure if that counts.
20. ## DA: Derailers Anonymous Thread II

I like pretty much all seafood and sometimes fresh-water fish, but it better be prepared well. I can even enjoy slimy, salty oysters on crackers.
21. ## Bigfoot ....surviving remnant

This is how we ended up with the World Trade Centers being blown up on 9-11. Discounting of reports based on opinions. If thousands of people believe they have seen something, then something was seen. Whether it was a hairy bipedal ape, or one of a thousand other things, would be up to the data collected investigating.
22. ## DA: Derailers Anonymous Thread II

I have your halo. I swiped it and am hiding it.
23. ## Bigfoot ....surviving remnant

I'd agree. Eyewitness testimony should not be proof, but should lead any investigation into a place to start in gathering evidence.
24. ## Bigfoot ....surviving remnant

There was a discussion a while back where a poster said that lots of sightings occurred in semi-urban areas, like parks completely enclosed by city, and that was proof that bigfoot didn't exist. I countered that the same argument could be made in reverse with sightings in the far north of Canada which had multiple witnesses and included experienced outdoorsmen. Which would prove that BF did exist. My point was that you can't just take any single sighting and use it to discount all sightings. As with something like a Muslim Terrorist (Just a convenient term, not to say Muslims are defacto terrorists.), each report should be investigated individually regarding the facts. You don't discount a report of a fanatical terrorist, just because 5, or 10, or 200, other reports turned out to not be true. Bigfoot could be shown to be real with a single proven sighting. However the fact is that no such proven sighting has happened yet. Still that shouldn't allow for shoddy conclusions and assumptions by so many who say they are being logical and scientific.
25. ## DA: Derailers Anonymous Thread II

Strange to pull a 180 on you (sorta), but I actually love seafood. It's fresh water fish I can't stand. I guess what I mean is I love shellfish. Lobster, shrimp, etc. That stuff is the bomb.
26. ## Can science prove or disprove "God"?

I’m going to jump in here briefly just to correct a misconception that I’m sure Lilly is already aware of. Science has never attempted to determine whether or not there is a “need” for God as you seem to be implying but has shown that there is no “requirement” for the existance of such an entity. That’s a rather subtle, but no less valid, distinction that should be understood in these kinds of discussions. cormac