What Is The Last Movie/Show You Saw? (8 Viewers)

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5AUA7XS0TvA
Ancient similarities of myths symbols from around the most ancient World, plus ideas concepts of plasma (physics), cosmology electrology.

Like lightning, electric/static travel upwards, connects, then light/photons travel downwards - similarily the Sun is hottest at its Corona and then its Surface, yet its inner surface is rumored to be cooler than the those outer layer/atmostphere of the star;
...upon hearing the Electrical Solar/Cosmology theory, it makes more sence than academically older and accepted theories without the alien-conspiracists flapping around it.

Extremely interesting, a must see stuff for all humans; also does not include alien-o-phile wierdo's that you see on conspiracy and cult channels who only have attended a university to give their ideas a purchase-able quality.
 
Last edited:
A program about Viking art....what do they mean with aggressive, violent, murderous...we weren't that bad, were we?
A female priest still see us as terrorists!
 

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ninQsWVTxU

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gTS0Vv3yS6U

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ia3_VsEAvk8

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5DEvb6yEQ_0
Brad Woodfield said:
The standard scientific process is Hypothesis, Test or Observe, Update Hypothesis based on observation results. However it seems that current process is Hypothesis, find results that match your Hypothesis, publish as proof based on observations. Frankly it's no different than the saying: Seeing only what you believe, and believing only what you see.

The problem is to be taken 'seriously' in today's scientific mainstream you need to be published. To be published you need to have backing by the scientific community with peer reviews, etc. When your theories and observations counter the "good old boy's" theories' they don't like it. Especially when they have achieved community standing and financial backing based on those theories. So to avoid loosing their standing and financial well being they call your theories and observations to task, stating that they are pseudo-science or invalid.

Look at the theory of Dark Matter. Using the current gravitational model, and outdated theories there are HUGE gaps in the amount of matter present in the universe. So they came up with a magic number to fill the blank. This allowed the current scientific regime to keep their existing gravitational theories with only minor changes, and opened up the door for additional goose chase experiments.
How many millions of dollars has been spent on the search for this non-existent particle. There are satellites in space looking for it, research facilities built deep in the earth with 24/7 observations, the CERN LHC experiments, the IceCube experiment at the south pole, along with countless other experiments, conferences, etc.

If the standard scientific model was applied the idea of Dark Matter would be thrown out the window, but because it's now become a major pillar to all the other ramshackle theories no major institute is going to go against it.
The same goes for red-shift and the Dark Energy theories. The idea that the Universe is expanding at an ever expanding rate requires an influx of energy the extends off to infinity. All because they current model explains the red-shift as a 'Doppler' effect instead of an energy level.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back