Jump to content
Unexplained Mysteries uses cookies. By using the site you consent to our use of cookies as per our Cookie Policy.
Close X
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
UM-Bot

NASA astronauts pass UFO 'lie detector test'

58 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

IronReb

Maybe even up to the number of spirals in a galaxy ....cant confirm that though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
stereologist
1 hour ago, IronReb said:

No idea how to answer that....I posted it because in the video it talks a lot about tetrahedral geometry which got me to instantly thinking of the Fibonacci numbers and wondering if there is a connection between the two.

Tetrahedrons are connected to Fibonacci numbers how?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
IronReb
4 minutes ago, stereologist said:

Tetrahedrons are connected to Fibonacci numbers how?

Assuming the guy in the video was not talking a bunch of BS...19.5 degrees could be expressed in many different places involving pyramids in Mexico, places on mars and Jupiter...just like the Fibonacci numbers appear all in nature..maybe the 19.5 degree is a natural number that our ancestors realized as a sacred number?  Did you watch the video?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist
1 minute ago, IronReb said:

Assuming the guy in the video was not talking a bunch of BS...19.5 degrees could be expressed in many different places involving pyramids in Mexico, places on mars and Jupiter...just like the Fibonacci numbers appear all in nature..maybe the 19.5 degree is a natural number that our ancestors realized as a sacred number?  Did you watch the video?

I did not watch the video but I've heard the BS about 19.5 degrees many times. It covers pyramids, volcanoes, and whatever the speaker wants to pretend is true.

The Fibonacci numbers appear in many places. That is correct, but they have been given a magical mystique which is really odd. They are a sequence. There are plenty of sequences. The main difference is that the Fibonacci are easy to describe. That allows people to trick those without a math background that there is something special.

Take squares. They tell us how objects fall faster and faster. They tell us how lights appear to dim as we step back from them. They tell us why the bark of trees cracks as the trees grow. Magical in any way? no.

Can you tell me what was claimed about 19.5 or where this BS appears in the video?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
IronReb

No, I can't. I try to keep an open mind to both sides of the argument though. There was one interesting thing about 30-35 minutes into it though in regards to a rotating sphere versus a none rotating sphere and gravity though. Please, by all means, please disprove the BS of this video or any other source I come across. One learns from multiple sources do they not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
IronReb

the 19.5 degrees was referenced to places on Mars and Jupiter and the pyramids in Mexico is that is what you were asking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ChrLzs
5 hours ago, IronReb said:

What is your thoughts on this...tetrahedral geometry and Fibonacci in nature after watching this....... warning , video is almost 2 hours long...

 

Sorry, Iron, but I started at about 32 minutes in, and when he:

  • contradicted well-known (and EXTREMELY well-tested physics)
  • repeated hogwash from Bruce De Palma, who is (sorry, was as I understand he is now dead) an over-unity/free energy loonie/scammer (pick one)
  • vomited out a pile of word salad and bulldung about the "hyper-dimensional space time boundary", without a single proper citation or explanation... I stopped watching.

 

Mate, do you know just how many loonies or scammers have claimed they knew the 'secret' to boundless free energy?  Do you know how many of those people have managed to even do a basic demonstration in front of knowledgeable engineers (you know, those who know, and are bound by, the Laws of the Universe)?

True open-mindedness (the type where your brains don't fall out..) doesn't mean accepting any old garbage, just because it is a topic you might not be familiar with - it also requires that you take the time to:

1. read up on the topic from the mainstream science, and see what the limitations are and, more importantly, why we think those limitations and laws apply.

2. do a bit of basic checking on the quality of your sources.  Eg a quick Google on Bruce DePalma will show you NO mainstream science site that endorses him, and information like this:

http://wiki.naturalphilosophy.org/index.php?title=Bruce_E_DePalma

De Palma died shortly after one of the most embarrassing failures (and ALL of his tests were failures) where his latest and best 'over-unity' device just overheated and died, showing no indication whatsoever of the claims.  It was immediately abandoned by the suckers folks who had invested in it.  That's what these guys do, use weasel words and impressive sounding terms to fleece money off people who do not understand why the Laws of Thermodynamics exist.

The guy in the video is Richard C Hoagland, I believe?  Oh dear. (Funny how they edited out the part where he introduces himself - well knowing how many people would immediately tune out...)  here's how his *own* book publisher describes him:

Quote

 

a unique mixture of amateur scientist, genius inventor, scam artist, and performer, blending true, legitimate speculative science with his own extrapolations, tall tales, and inflations

 

His own publisher calls him a scammer?  Wow.

Thing is, if we *could* somehow extract free energy from space or create an 'over-unity' device that always put out more energy than it received, then there is no way in hell you could cover that up, and our entire society would change immeasurably...  But the old 'no free lunch' principle applies, and you do not and will not get free energy by moving levers and spinning magnets.  Sure, science and the Universe may have some surprises yet in store, but if anything *real* is discovered, you won't hear about it first from the tinfoilhat brigade of Hoagland and his ilk.

Anyway, sorry to sound harsh, but I've wasted way too much of my time dealing with Hoagland in the past.

If there's something in that video that you found interesting (I didn't get to the bit about Fibonacci sequences and tetrahedral geometry, sorry) then why not start a new thread and explain what you found interesting and why.  It would be well worth reading up on both topics beforehand, and then relistening to what Hoagland says, as it is his habit to simply throw in lots of ideas and unrelated concepts that he thinks might fit his topic, and that the average Joe won't understand.  This is a well known technique, where instead on focusing on simple concepts and fully and comprehensively explaining how they dovetail into the overall claim, one at a time.. the tinfoiler will instead go on a Gish Gallop, knowing that no-one will be bothered to check a long list of ideas and debunk every one.

So, beware.. if these are topics you are not familiar with, then Hoagland might sound as if he's got something - do come on back if you think that's the case..  But that man's history precedes him, and without some actual testable claims, I'll pass.

Ask yourself, instead of all the talk, grandiose scientific terms and poorly annotated diagrams that generally show not much more than pattern matching... why doesn't Hoagland actually explain the terms, and then show the methodology, the raw data and maths, the fully annotated video?  Why doesn't he describe how he has applied Scientific Principles, eg:

  • show the actual observations
  • discuss the existing research
  • form a hypothesis
  • test the hypothesis using all relevant controls (null, negative/positive/placebo, randomisation/blind/double-, controlled variables, elimination of bias, etc)
  • record data
  • draw conclusion
  • seek replication 

That's what *real* scientists do.  Scammers post Youtube videos about faces on Mars... and ask you to donate.  Please don't take my post too personally - my disdain is towards Hoagland, De Palma and some others like Steven Greer, who are in the Hall of SHAME.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist

The 19.5 degree thingy is all BS. If you check the coordinates yourself you learnt hat the objects are not where the video claims. You also find that important places of the type they mention are not on 19.5. It also turns out that if you look into their BS math that the only 19.5 is 19.5S. Do they mention that? No

It is fairly easy to trick people with such claims. They don't apply critical thinking in which we ask questions about the material presented.

1. Are the coordinates correct?

Tehtihuacan is at 19 degrees 41 minutes N or 19.7

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teotihuacan

The site I provided a link for below lists Mauna Loa at 19.5

The link claims hurricanes for at 19.5. That is false.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tropical_cyclone#Locations

2. Are similar places not at the specified location?

The GP at Giza is not

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Pyramid_of_Giza

But these volcanoes are not: dozen active volcanoes in Indonesia and Japan, Vesuvius, Etna, Kamchtka, Alaska, etc.

None of the super volcanoes are

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supervolcano

So where does this BS come from? It comes from the laughable sacred geometry people.

http://vigilantdream.blogspot.com/2008/12/spherical-geometry-195-degrees.html

It is a lot of made up nonsense.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.