Whatever Happened to Ning Li?

If Ning Li's work had amounted to anything promising, I imagine no one would be wondering what happened to her.

That is, unless we're talking Secret Government Ops here, in which case this really does belong in the Conspiracy Forum.
 
OCaptain said:
Either Ziggurat is more than one person or you have poor grammar.

Which is it?
Click to expand...

'Their' can be singular as a place holder rather than 'his' or 'hers', so one may say that is their dog, that is their house, that is their idea.

Where does common grammar say otherwise? (I don't mean that meanly, the US participials can be rather loose)

The US version of english and english in general has some strange rules about plurals. The consistency of Italian or Spanish is not the same in english.
 
Last edited:
OCaptain said:
Further, I would love to be able to look up and consult a scientific discussion about her claims and such that explain it in more detail than "it's crap" (no offense meant to Ziggurat).

Can you point to anything of that nature? Anywhere? At all, theprestige?
Click to expand...

Can you point to anything other than her paper that points to and verifies this alleged phenomena?
 
I spent about ten minutes researching her, this is what I got
she got a government development contract worth about 500,000 dollars, she didn't complete the contract and kept all the money
When she left UAH, she went to the Baltimore area for some medical reason
she started her own company called "AC Gravity LLC" which later disbanded, the offer price on the two office buildings her company owned sold for $1,500,000
she's been working for the DoD since 2005 on secret projects, which is why there is no information on her in the public sector

theres a 16 page thread on this subject here
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread331108/pg1
you'll need your anti woo glasses
;)
 
Marduk said:
this is a classic example of an appeal to authority
just to refresh you, here's wiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority


you just did
;)

basically whenever you place an anecdotal account as more valuable than any other anecdotal account you are falling into the trap
It is evidence, not claims that decide the truth, Ning Li could come out and state that she has manufactured an actual anti gravity engine, but until she's built it and its been tested and shown to work, in any discussion of the subject its irrelevant.
Click to expand...

You're still wrong about me making an appeal to authority. Look up what rhetorical tools actually are instead of pushing false ideas. If you'd read the definition on the wiki page you linked to, it would have stopped you before you posted it.

Try again.

What did she demo to Popular Mechanics then?
 
Last edited:
Marduk said:
I spent about ten minutes researching her, this is what I got
she got a government development contract worth about 500,000 dollars, she didn't complete the contract and kept all the money
When she left UAH, she went to the Baltimore area for some medical reason
she started her own company called "AC Gravity LLC" which later disbanded, the offer price on the two office buildings her company owned sold for $1,500,000
she's been working for the DoD since 2005 on secret projects, which is why there is no information on her in the public sector

theres a 16 page thread on this subject here
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread331108/pg1
you'll need your anti woo glasses
;)
Click to expand...
Yeah, I found all that years ago, but it's rumor. There are no documents that can be traced back, nothing after she left the University and started AC Gravity.

Word of mouth isn't evidence. You of all people shouldn't have to be reminded of that. I'm trying to find out what - if anything - is at the core of what she was building.

As of now, all people are coming back with falls into 2 categories:

1. It's crap (but undefined)
2. She might be working for the DoD under a gag order but that doesn't matter because stupidity exists at all levels and she just hoodwinked someone.

I'm looking for something more constructive.
 
Dancing David said:
Can you point to anything other than her paper that points to and verifies this alleged phenomena?
Click to expand...
Just the "Popular Mechanics" article. I'm still trying to decide who the original article writer was.
 
Last edited:
OCaptain said:
Yeah, I found all that years ago, but it's rumor. There are no documents that can be traced back, nothing after she left the University and started AC Gravity.

Word of mouth isn't evidence. You of all people shouldn't have to be reminded of that. I'm trying to find out what - if anything - is at the core of what she was building.

As of now, all people are coming back with falls into 2 categories:

1. It's crap (but undefined)
2. She might be working for the DoD under a gag order but that doesn't matter because stupidity exists at all levels and she just hoodwinked someone.

I'm looking for something more constructive.
Click to expand...

well, it appears you aren't satisfied with the answers you are getting. What answer are you after, then?
 
OCaptain said:
You're still wrong about me making an appeal to authority. Look up what rhetorical tools actually are instead of pushing false ideas. If you'd read the definition on the wiki page you linked to, it would have stopped you before you posted it.

Try again.

What did she demo to Popular Mechanics then?
Click to expand...

um, no, once again you've been caught out and simply refuse to admit it, if you weren't making a claim from authority then why did you question Ziggurats credentials in the first place, if he'd turned out to hold the physics chair at Oxford it would still have been irrelevant, scientific truth is and always has been based on empirical evidence, not unproven hypothesis or counter claims
really, getting a bit sick of your dishonest debating tactics, its not like you could go back and edit out all your appeals to authority from this thread,
you've done it numerous times,
OCaptain said:
So, it's not possible that she knew more than you?
Click to expand...
OCaptain said:
-are you a Physicist by profession?
Click to expand...
OCaptain said:
I hold the trained positions of specialists higher than those of amateurs and other non-professionals .
Click to expand...
maybe actually reading what other people are saying to you would help, but alas, you never do unless theyre agreeing with you
this is all getting samey like with your other thread where you claimed the bible as your authority for the Exodus and wouldn't examine any evidence to the contrary.
:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Did you make any attempt to follow up in the literature?

http://www.springerlink.com/content/qq12567j8h45ggv1/

"Torr and Li claim to have shown that experimentally detectable gravitomagnetic and gravitoelectric fields can be generated in a superconductor. We review their calculations and show that because of unrealistic assumptions the fields that they calculate are too large by many orders of magnitude." Published in the same journal that published Li's work.

http://iopscience.iop.org/0295-5075/35/6/413/

"We show that this phenomenon has no explanation in the standard gravity theories, except possibly in the non-perturbative Euclidean quantum theory." Actual mainstream journal; shows that Li's calculations disagree with GR.

http://iopscience.iop.org/0034-4885/60/2/001
 
OCaptain said:
Maybe someone willing to be an unofficial research partner?
Click to expand...

for what ?
Podkletnov is a nut
Eugene Podkletnov said:
The second generation of flying machines will reflect gravity waves and will be small, light, and fast, like UFOs.
Click to expand...
apparently something that doesn't exist yet will be like something which is currently unidentified
:D
 
Last edited:
Marduk said:
um, no, once again you've been caught out and simply refuse to admit it, if you weren't making a claim from authority then why did you question Ziggurats credentials in the first place, if he'd turned out to hold the physics chair at Oxford it would still have been irrelevant, scientific truth is and always has been based on empirical evidence, not unproven hypothesis or counter claims
really, getting a bit sick of your dishonest debating tactics, its not like you could go back and edit out all your appeals to authority from this thread,
you've done it numerous times,



maybe actually reading what other people are saying to you would help, but alas, you never do unless theyre agreeing with you
this is all getting samey like with your other thread where you claimed the bible as your authority for the Exodus and wouldn't examine any evidence to the contrary.
:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
You're just arguing to argue. I know because how long have the Truthers been caught in the 9/11 conspiracy threads trying to claim they know this, that or the other thing,When it comes down to brass tacks, they have no education in the specialties they're claiming knowledge of? Sorry, they're told all the time that their non-professional opinions aren't going to overturn scientific consensus, and now here, because it's me and it suits you, you think you can get away with that ****? Education matters and is owed a measure of respect until someone proves himself or herself loony.

Um, no. Just take a break, and come back when you're ready <SNIP>.

Edited by Locknar: 
Edited, breach of rule 0/rule 12.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
ben m said:
Did you make any attempt to follow up in the literature?

http://www.springerlink.com/content/qq12567j8h45ggv1/

"Torr and Li claim to have shown that experimentally detectable gravitomagnetic and gravitoelectric fields can be generated in a superconductor. We review their calculations and show that because of unrealistic assumptions the fields that they calculate are too large by many orders of magnitude." Published in the same journal that published Li's work.

http://iopscience.iop.org/0295-5075/35/6/413/

"We show that this phenomenon has no explanation in the standard gravity theories, except possibly in the non-perturbative Euclidean quantum theory." Actual mainstream journal; shows that Li's calculations disagree with GR.

http://iopscience.iop.org/0034-4885/60/2/001
Click to expand...
As I stated way back that I am not a physics or engineering professional. I don't know what "the literature" is.

Thank you for the links, though.
 
Marduk said:
for what ?
Podkletnov is a nut

apparently something that doesn't exist yet will be like something which is currently unidentified
:D
Click to expand...
He's a nut based on what documented evidence? All quotes need citations, or they're useless.
 
OCaptain said:
You're just arguing to argue. I know because how long have the Truthers been caught in the 9/11 conspiracy threads trying to claim they know this, that or the other thing,When it comes down to brass tacks, they have no education in the specialties they're claiming knowledge of. Sorry, they're told all the time that their non-professional opinions aren't going to overturn scientific consensus, and now here, because it's me and it suits you, you think you can get away with that ****? Education matters and is owed a measure of respect until someone proves himself or herself loony.

Um, no. Just take a break, and come back when you're ready to be a grown up.
Click to expand...

Scientific Consensus is normally achieved through communication at conferences, the publication process, replication (reproducible results by others) and peer review
Click to expand...
once again you have failed to understand what you are talking about, it isn't that the truthers are unqualified, but that they have no supporting evidence

:rolleyes:
OCaptain said:
He's a nut based on what documented evidence? All quotes need citations, or they're useless.
Click to expand...
reading comprehension Fail, perhaps you could let me see the empirical data on the performance of the UFO's that Podkletnov was referring to ?
;)
 
Last edited:
Marduk said:
once again you have failed to understand what you are talking about, it isn't that the truthers are unqualified, but that they have no supporting evidence

:rolleyes:

reading comprehension Fail, perhaps you could let me see the empirical data on the performance of the UFO's that Podkletnov was referring to ?
;)
Click to expand...
What you're missing is the obvious connecting tissue of why they have no evidence to their lack of education. It's why some of us look at advanced math or physics formulae and we see gibberish, but others look at it and understand it.

Simple.
 
OCaptain said:
What you're missing is the obvious connecting tissue of why they have no evidence to their lack of education. It's why some of us look at advanced math or physics formulae and we see gibberish, but others look at it and understand it.

Simple.
Click to expand...

again you have it wrong, scientific evidence is independant of education, it is the evidence itself is what is important, not who is using it as part of their argument or their level of education.
you still do not understand argumentum ad verecundiam

I'll simplify this for you

my friend tells me that
1. he is cooking a roast dinner for lunch
2. that he's cooked roast dinners before
3. that he once did a cookery course so is qualified to cook roast dinners
4. that his family has a tradition of cooking roast dinners
5. he shows me the ingredients for the roast dinner
6. he shows me the oven he intends to cook the roast dinner in
7. he shows me pictures of previous roast dinners he's cooked
8. he describes how he intends to prepare the ingredients
9. he demonstrates that the oven is fully functional by turning it on
10. he introduces another friend who describes the roast dinner they had a week before

at what stage should I have total faith in the upcoming roast dinner ?
if your answer was anything except "when its on a plate in front of me" you'd have been wrong
:p
 
OCaptain said:
As of now, all people are coming back with falls into 2 categories:

1. It's crap (but undefined)
2. She might be working for the DoD under a gag order but that doesn't matter because stupidity exists at all levels and she just hoodwinked someone.
Click to expand...

You missed Ziggurat's explanation of why her physics simply doesn't work. In other words he may have said "it's crap" but he also explained why.

If you didn't understand that explanation the thing to do is not to ignore it and pretend it doesn't exist: the thing to do is to ask him to clarify the parts that you don't understand.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom