Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Harte

Dunn admits

Recommended Posts

Harte
Posted (edited)

https://youtu.be/BS8fPje0mwU?t=422

 

Harte

 

Edited by Harte
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Piney

He made it all up but somebody in the future might be able to do it?  What a steaming pile! 

This milkman is lame and his body language says "made up **** for money". 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cladking

Gee,  I see where he said all the evidence has to fit theory and if new evidence arises it has to fit it as well or the theory is chucked out.  

 

I didn't see where he said he threw out evidence or made it up.  

 

Real science has always progressed ONLY by considering ALL the evidence.  New evidence is often paradigm changing anomaly.  

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Piney
16 minutes ago, cladking said:

I didn't see where he said he threw out evidence or made it up.  

He pretty much stated there was no evidence........

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cladking
3 minutes ago, Piney said:

He pretty much stated there was no evidence........

About where was that in the video?  

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Piney
Just now, cladking said:

About where was that in the video?  

They very beginning. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cladking
31 minutes ago, Piney said:

They very beginning. 

I've watched the first ten minutes three times now and missed it.  

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Windowpane

cladking said:

Quote

About where was that in the video?  

About 07:17, Dunn says his copy editor asked him why he kept writing "this is just speculation".  So, apparently, Dunn withdrew that and similar qualifying comments, which (I suppose) gave the MS a much more assertive tone.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hanslune
1 hour ago, cladking said:

Real science has always progressed ONLY by considering ALL the evidence.  New evidence is often paradigm changing anomaly.  

Something I would recommend you do. Instead of running from the experiments that show your translations of PT don't work.

  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hanslune
1 hour ago, Piney said:

He pretty much stated there was no evidence........

Gee he finally noted that small point?

  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Piney
Just now, Hanslune said:

Gee he finally noted that small point?

Of course. It's easy to miss being such a minor detail. :yes:

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hanslune
Just now, Piney said:

Of course. It's easy to miss being such a minor detail. :yes:

Yes the people in the future will figure it out - someone will discover the cable to transfer all the power to Memphis across the river......

Yeah I have a Editor like that too.

 

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Hanslune
14 hours ago, Harte said:

What a goofy sod he was/is.

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cladking
2 hours ago, Windowpane said:

 

About 07:17, Dunn says his copy editor asked him why he kept writing "this is just speculation".  So, apparently, Dunn withdrew that and similar qualifying comments, which (I suppose) gave the MS a much more assertive tone.

There's really absolutely no difference between an Egyptologists citing existing opinion or saying that "evidence suggests" and Dunn saying that he alone followed the evidence and this is where it has taken him.   

This is not to say I agree or disagree with Dunn on any point at all, merely that he has defined his writing style that omits conditional phraseology.  If someone says that he believes the pyramid was a homing beacon for aliens it doesn't suddenly become necessary to restate his beliefs in every sentence.  If an Egyptologist proposes that the Red Pyramid was built before Meidum he is not required to state that he believes they were not power plants and that they were tombs.  No writer states all his premises, definitions, and axioms in every sentence.  In science it is necessary to separate statements of fact from opinion but not only are we not dealing with science here but we are dealing with a panoply of opinion and assumptions.  Egyptology has their assumptions and Dunn has his own.  He did NOT say he made up anything at all.  He "made up" his "theory" about power plants based on physical evidence and logic which is the EXACT SAME THING Egyptologists have done.  Egyptologists made up the tomb theory from their assumptions and their interpretation of the evidence.  Just as many disagree with Egyptology, many disagree with Dunn.  

Say what you will but Dunn's theory does explain more evidence than Egyptology's and AS HE SAID IN THE VIDEO, any theory should explain all of the evidence and is defective when evidence contradicts the hypothesis.  

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hanslune
1 hour ago, cladking said:

Say what you will but Dunn's theory does explain more evidence than Egyptology's and AS HE SAID IN THE VIDEO

No it doesn't that is just your opinion said to get people to respond to you. While in fact you say things such as this:

Quote

any theory should explain all of the evidence and is defective when evidence contradicts the hypothesis. 

YOU don't do that and neither did Dunn. Did he ever explain why no one could ever find any evidence of devices needing 'power'? Kinda of a defect huh? Kinda like having no geysers at Giza and the PT not supporting what you made up. Yet you don't seem to mention those 'minor' defects....LOL

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Windowpane
2 hours ago, Hanslune said:

...

YOU don't do that and neither did Dunn. Did he ever explain why no one could ever find any evidence of devices needing 'power'?  ...

Nonsense, Hanslune!

There were all those helicopters ... and lightbulbs ...

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hanslune
1 hour ago, Windowpane said:

Nonsense, Hanslune!

There were all those helicopters ... and lightbulbs ...

Yes one of my favorite fake things. Unfortunately I never got to go see the original.

https://web.archive.org/web/20050728103638/http://www.finart.be/UfocomHq/usabydos.htm

myst2a.jpg

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Harte

It was microwave beams. They were shot out into space (though the "air shafts") and collected there by the alien overlord spaceship.

Because, you know, nobody can think far enough ahead to have enough power to get home from your interstellar rock stacking lectures.

Nope. Had to wait a decade or two for the monkeys to stack up rocks to generate the microwave beams for your collector, while 1.21 Jigawatts of power from the Sun is streaming by your ship every second

giphy.gif.

Harte

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 2

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.