• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged Does CERN prove Einstein wrong?

JayUtah said:
I've assisted in the design and construction of nuclear powerplants and reactors. Are you calling me a liar?
Click to expand...

The idea that nuclear power plants are a hoax is a very speculative theory I admit. They may very well be real. But if they are a hoax then my theory is that they are in reality water fuel cell power plants that functions the same way nuclear power plants do except that the heat comes from burning hydrogen and oxygen (split water) instead of heat generated by nuclear rods.
 
Anders Lindman said:
You can rotate all you want. If two spaceships move away from each other in opposite directions at 0.7c the relative velocity will be 1.4c.
Click to expand...

Well, this is correct if you are using a starting line(Frame of reference) as a point of reference where both ships depart from each other at 0.7c. I'm no Einstein, but relatively speaking, these ships are only traveling at 0.7c speed. The speed of them traveling apart from one another totals 1.4c, so how does this prove Einstein wrong?
 
Anders Lindman said:
Not always. For example HIV is a hoax I believe. And thousands of research papers have been published about HIV without any of the scientists actually having checked if there really is such virus in the first place. They just cite some original scientific papers that claim HIV has been discovered (isolated) and then they go on and endlessly study individual molecules, receptors etc supposedly related to the virus.
Click to expand...

Wow! Just...wow! This makes Me think that you have suspected yourself as a hoax at one point.
 
Belz... said:
Since you have told us that Einstein's theory is "obviously" false, why are so few people in the know ? Those professors should be able to spot the flaws in the theory, should they not ? Why are you the only one claiming that it's a hoax ? What makes you so special, especially considering your obvious, and admitted, ignorance of the subject matter ?
Click to expand...

I'm surely not the only one.

"An electrical engineer has explored the Hoax of Einstein's Theories of Relativity in a new book. Einstein and the Emperor's-New-Clothes Syndrome: The Exposé of a Charlatan, by Robert L. Henderson, suggests that Einstein's relativity theories are incorrect" -- http://www.prweb.com/releases/2007/4/prweb522531.htm

"Articles have been appearing all over the Internet asserting that Albert Einstein was a hoax." -- http://www.anusha.com/einstein.htm
 
Anders Lindman said:
...
Click to expand...

I think the Saturn V rockets were built publicly but the purpose of these rockets was for military purposes.

If the known Saturn V articles were used for military launches, then what does it matter what size they were? You seem to be claiming that the very public launches of the publicly constructed Saturn Vs from Launch Complex 39 were really secret military payloads. Why can't these have been of the specified size? What's the relevance of your claim that they may not have been as big as specified? Are you just making all this up as you go?

Heck, even the Apollo launches may have had military payloads since they hardly carried any astronauts.

So you believe the Apollo moon landings were hoaxes?
 
Anders Lindman said:
...
Click to expand...

The idea that nuclear power plants are a hoax is a very speculative theory I admit.

Is that an admission that you have made a claim for which you have no evidence? Do you do this habitually?

They may very well be real.

I assert that they are, and I further assert that I have the relevant expertise and access to the relevant facts to support that assertion.

You are claiming otherwise. Please provide the extremely strong evidence that would be necessary to unseat my belief and assertion that nuclear powerplants are real.

But if they are a hoax then my theory is that they are in reality water fuel cell power plants that functions the same way nuclear power plants do except that the heat comes from burning hydrogen and oxygen (split water) instead of heat generated by nuclear rods.

Please provide your evidence that any of the commercial power plants in operation today operate this way. And please provide a detailed engineering analysis for how a power plant based on "splitting water" to obtain the constituent hydrogen and oxygen can operate at a net power gain. Do you realize the energy requirement to crack water?
 
JayUtah said:
Please provide your evidence that any of the commercial power plants in operation today operate this way. And please provide a detailed engineering analysis for how a power plant based on "splitting water" to obtain the constituent hydrogen and oxygen can operate at a net power gain. Do you realize the energy requirement to crack water?
Click to expand...

Let's say that Einstein's theories were published as a smokescreen for the real science. What is the real science? One part is the knowledge about how to utilize zero-point energy, including for very efficiently splitting water into hydrogen and oxygen. In a water fuel plant the water is split into hydrogen and oxygen that goes into a burning chamber which turns the oxygen and hydrogen into water again that is then fed back into the water splitting cell in a closed loop. That's a typical use of the knowledge the shadow powers have kept hidden from the public.
 
Anders Lindman said:
Yep.
Click to expand...

Of course, how silly of me to doubt that you would take anything at face value.

You do realize, however, that there is a mountain of evidence establishing the Apollo missions as manned space flights, and none whatsoever establishing them as secret military flights. Why do you insist on believing something that is so soundly controverted by evidence?

And before we delve into this subject, please be so kind as to read the web site I wrote on the subject: http://www.clavius.org
 
Anders Lindman said:
...
Click to expand...

One part is the knowledge about how to utilize zero-point energy...

I asked for a detailed engineering analysis, not further speculation.

Do you have any evidence that any existing nuclear power plant operates according to so-called "zero point energy" instead of nuclear fission?

I told you I have the expertise and facts to assert that nuclear power plants indeed work according to nuclear fission. You are essentially calling me a liar. I'm therefore asking you to back up your accusation or withdraw it. Will you do so?

That's a typical use of the knowledge the shadow powers have kept hidden from the public.

I asked you to name some of these shadow-power scientists and practitioners and tell us how you determined that's what they were. Why haven't you done that?
 
Anders Lindman said:
Let's say that Einstein's theories were published as a smokescreen for the real science. What is the real science? One part is the knowledge about how to utilize zero-point energy, including for very efficiently splitting water into hydrogen and oxygen. In a water fuel plant the water is split into hydrogen and oxygen that goes into a burning chamber which turns the oxygen and hydrogen into water again that is then fed back into the water splitting cell in a closed loop. That's a typical use of the knowledge the shadow powers have kept hidden from the public.
Click to expand...

I don't want to derail this thread, but perhaps you can start another regarding zero-point technology.
Why don't you check and compare the amount of hydrogen in gasoline as compared to water?
 
JayUtah said:
I asked you to name some of these shadow-power scientists and practitioners and tell us how you determined that's what they were. Why haven't you done that?
Click to expand...

Shadow power means that the members are not known publicly. And even people like Albert Einstein are probably only front people.
 
Anders Lindman said:
Shadow power means that the members are not known publicly. And even people like Albert Einstein are probably only front people.
Click to expand...

So in other words, you don't know if this alleged power actually exists are not. In light of that, is it really intelligent to use the allegation of such influences as a means of patching up holes in your speculation? Aren't you really just piling speculation on top of speculation?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom