PDA

View Full Version : I enjoy a good yarn but...


malaidas
20-March-2009, 03:49 PM
This may seem like an odd first post from someone joining a site dediated to science and astronomy, and I certainly wont post many here save the occasional unavoidable knee jerks when I read something totally devoid of rationality. However in recognition that it was through investigating counter arguments to the spurious EU that I found this board I'll start out my board life by asking something which as a Brit has intrigued me for some time.

What is it about NASA which gets all the CTers in the USA so worked up. There seems to be more focus on NASA than the CIA as far as I can see and I admit I may well be wrong, certainly its always the NASA ones (with the exception of the twin towers one) which seem to make there way over to this side of the pond.

The thing is I simply can;t see what the problem is (with the exception of Roswell CT) there seems to be no grounds for the CT to even start out re NASA and even then thats more military than NASA and I thought the two were very much seperate organisations.

Before I begin however, as an introduction, I'm a biochemist and computer programmer, hailing from the Wirral just south of Liverpool, my interest in astronomy and physics in general is very much on an recreational basis with currently an only passing level of knowledge which I hope greatly to expand upon from discussions on this board.

ANyway in honour of what got me here I wish to add my 2 penny's worth on the 'Planet X' conspiricy theory. I've chosen this one becuase of the 'work' of James MCCanney which I also came into contact with whilst looking at the stuff on EU. Indeed its something which I personnally found rather offensive that whilst looking for his work on Plasma Cosmology/EU that I was exposed to such IMO meaningless drivel as I will attempt to show. As an aside I mention that not being an expert on Cosmology etc, this was the first indication that the work on PC/EU was probably pipe dreams, as Tim has conclusively proven to me with his sensical (if there is such a word) explanations on where the theory simply doesn;t match observation.

Anyway to the point.

In the next few paragraphs I will engage in a mental exercise and attempt to, using their own weapons, blow the CT about 'Planet X' wide open to question for anyone with half a brain who believes it. I do this as I said partially to simply get some anger off my chest, and partially to try and open the minds of at least a few believers to the implausibility of the truth. Please forgive any wild rides of fancy that may occur during this account, I believe I am justified in doing such during a CT build up. ALso I accept there are areas in this construct where I don't know and I will make these plain as I go along. Pleasae bear in mind that this is simply an exercise in thought and fun debate and probably not going to turn out as well as I hope, I just hope it hangs together, still it can;t be worse than the original CTs often are.

As any debate on such a CT as this is inevitably without visible evidence, part of the power it has to win over the gullible a\s no counter evidence can be given to prove it wrong. Therefore I will start out by attempting to build a case from which some kind of rational belief in NASA as engaged in Cover ups can be logically supported and then I will show how, that the very existence of this framework pretty much precludes the existence of Planet X, unless you simply start with the concept out of nowhere that NASA is an evil enterprise.

The first thing we need is evidence of a cover up in NASAs history to provide some evidence that the government is hushing things up from a NASA perspective. I deliberately ignore any other agency in this rebuttal as we need evidence that the US government considers space an area where information must be controlled. If we lack a single evidence case for the existence of cover ups, their existence must be questioned. If you are a true scientist no matter how ATM you are, you must accept this. In the absence of any evidence to back up a theory, you cannot accept the theory as correct. In the presence of credible evidence to the oposite the theory must be abandoned, unless the theory can be readilly adapted to match.

Now obviously there is a great candiate here from the CTers point of view.... The corner stone of Space Age Conspircy... Roswell. As I see it, this is the only real evidence of a coverup where there have been multiple somewhat respectable 'whistle blowers' and where there is a credible point to say something was covered up even if we don;t know what. The Moon Landing simply doesn't work, it lacks scientific and observational backing and would be more diffuclt to pull off than say going to the moon.

SO let us assume that a UFO was found at Roswell and that they did keep hold of this and they have kept it a secret (THere is I admit a lot of possibilities here which I haven;t covered, such as ET deals etc). What does this tell us. Well firstly that they are willing to cover one thing up, so what about other things. However it also tells us that they have at their disposal technology far in advance of our own, or at very leat in advance of what we have even today. This technology by definition must include the ability to make at least interplanetary flight. Assuming that they are only Martian or I supose Venitian in origin (I disinclude the possibility of moon based life here as we have been there and the evidence alone is enough to proove this as fact and we saw no life. Plus two many amature/professional astronomers have been observing the moon for far to long not to have seen some sign as far as I can see. Now we know that no life has been found on Mars and Venus is far to hot right, but of course this is CT and NASA so lets assume the evidence (which is based upon data that they get to filter) cannot be trusted. It doesn't make a difference. If UFO exist and based upon observation on their apparent behaviour tells us that they can travel very fast and if they visiot here regularly (which if the observations are correct in places like Arizona they do) they must be able to travel very fast between here and home (hours or a week or so at most I would have thought), which if we assume is only Mars or Venus then thats still means a fair rate of knots. Where do I get these figures from. Well its an estrapolated guess of course, but I figure that Aliens will need to eat still, there is unsufficent space in the ships to have a self sufficient food source so they must carry it with them, this puts a definite maximum on how long they can be away for and a week or 2 is the best we manage in tanks etc which don;t need minimal weight and maxiumum space usage for the systems. Tell you what, I'll be generous and allow for indefinite periods by allowing some form of enrgy synthesis into food like Star Trek. I'll allow that they don;t need to ever get out. Still we can manage the distance to Mars in a few months and based upon what they can manage in an atmosphere they will still likely have much faster drives than this in the almost vacume of space.

Lets not get too caught up on the capabilities of the craft though. The iomportant point is this. Whether or not the ship was functional when it was rescued there would be enough to go on for the scientists to have a working copy by this day. AFterall they've had over half a century. This ship provides the ability to go into outer space and this is important.

So how does this relate to Planet X. Lets summarise shall we. A huge plnetoid is entering our solar system, too distant to be seen outsaide of space based telescopes of NASA at the moment. This is on a collision course with earth and will wipe us out. The assumption here is that NASA is keeping it hidden, to stop panic and alarm. There is a precedent they kept Roswell hidden to prevent panic and alarm.

OK here is our CT how do we knock it down... There are numerous easy ways to do it, but I'm going to do it the hard way, by simply applying logical deduction upon the facts as stated which will show that the existence of the Roswell CT makes Planet X highly unlikely and that in the absence of Roswell this CT has no grounds at all, as I said earlier Roswell is the cornerstone on which any NASA conspiricy in the absence of evidence must hang for credibility. There is no direct evidence for Planet X, this is the whole reason why its a conspiricy.

So let us assume there is this big planet heading toward us and likely to impact causing an Extinction Level Event. What does the government do about it. Well Self presevation alone must dictate they do something. What are their options. Well on the one hand they could dig a deep bunker and hope to god that shockwaves don;t kill them. They can fleee with the aliens to Mars etc, leaving the rest of mankind to die horribly, yet now as refugees having nothing. Or they can use that nice fast UFO to intercept Planet X and do something about it. WHich option will they choose. Well given the existence of options 2 and 3, Option 1 is out of the question. The latter will leave them in power, with their economies etc intact amnd beholden to noone the former will leave them with nothing, so the latter will be chosen if possible. We already know that it is very possible to move the planets course if we can get a nuclear device to the planet in time. It just needs to be big enough and we have the UFO which can get us there. OK we need to be able to transport the device and the UFO may not have room. So what we have the UFO we can size it up.

Now comes the problem however, they cannot easilly do this without letting people on earth know that they covered something up. Why not. Well There are 2 major problems. No one blast will be enough to completely change the course of the asteroid so we will need several blasts at correct points to cortrectly change its vector of motion if they want it to not still pass within telescope range of people on earth (breaking the cover up) and if they do these blasts there is no way they will be able to hide the blasts from view unless they hide behind a planet. I doubt that it will be possible to make all the chnages whilst still in cover although I guess this is theoretically possible. given occlusion is a cone and the distances involved between say jupiter and earth and the heliopause plus I guess I can;t be sure that such would be visible from the range we are talking about, but you take my point I hope. Finally we have the problme of launching the craft without being seen from the ground... OK a cloaking device. But why dont we see cloaking devices in military devices, either directly or indirectly. The technology would certainly been noticed and reported on by someone and not conclusively debunked. There are all sorts of problems. The same is true of any technology on the ship to invisibly alter the course of the planet. Its usage would have been observed and there have been no persuaving evidence for this.

So we have a situation whereby in all probablity trying to deal with the problem will blow open the cover up on planet X and the Roswell incident. Not dealing with the problem in this way is not a viable option. Can you really see such 'evil' people submitting to being refugees or taking a chance on their lives and loosing their livelyhoods anyway just to keep a secret. Its a no brainer, they will act if they can out of self instinct if nothing else and this would likely blow their cover up, either by not completely keeping Planet X out of visible range or by using devices which will be visible to radiotelescopes etc. Of course the telescopes would have to be facing the correct way. But there are people such as yourselves looking for Planet X.

There is of course the possibility that we can't do anything about it which is why they are keeping hush hush. However this invalidates the assumption that Roswell occured and thus as I said giving no grounds for the shadow side of NASA to be considered.

If the above doesn;t make a point then consider the following

1) There are many near misses which NASA has faithfully warned us about
2) The effort of keeping this hidden are huge and even more so if we assume that there is something they can do about it and in the absence of a UFO, NASA could still do something about it, although there would need to be a longer time scale. Regardless of its size, any orbit Past say Jupiter (perhpas closer) would likely be enough to make the planet miss us. I'm no expert here as I said, but I'm preety sure all they need is an explosion which is small enough not to shatter the planetoid but enough to overcome its inertia and change its velocity by a relatively small amount. Without the UFO there is no way that they could keep it hidden however, by the time they could reach it (and this ignored the logistics of managing secret space launches) it would be visible to the world
4) NASA usually reports things accurately enough to convince the majority of people including field experts both in mainstream and legitimate honest ATM work. If there was doctoring it would be noticed. TO my knowledge, only those who have been previously hurt by NASA or who follow very wacky and none scientific work or who have a vested interest in selling a story provide the continuing 'evidence' that NASA is corrupt.

Now I've had my fun and no it didn't turn out as well as I hoped, I will, if there are any doubts left blow it open once and for all the easy way. What is the point. Lets deal with the real world here. We have the technology to prevent the impact, we have the time to do something about it. It doesn;t even need a manned launch. If we have a UFO all the better, but they wont use it for risk of blowing open the cover up of Roswell and if not then Planet X will be visible before we can do anything about it. EVen if they decided to simply send the rockets out without us seeing planet X, there would be observations of such being launched into outer space, or from the Space Station (star wars project) call it what you like. The changes are that someone would see the launches. The whole cover up would blow up in their faces, except in that small chance of being able to launch a captured alien craft, pilot it outside of visible range and then without being seen from earth set off devices which will divert the planet. That is a huge undertaking which is much more risky than telling us that yes something is coming, but we are already doing things about it, it wont impact and we have allowed for a safety margin in case. The bottom line is that it doesn;t make any sense whatsoever. There is no motive to keep it secret and a much greater motive not to.

Edited to add a single word I missed out.

astrophotographer
20-March-2009, 04:10 PM
To be honest, you lost me at:

In the next few paragraphs I will engage in a mental exercise

The rest seemed to be random wanderings all over the conspiracy world (i.e. Roswell, NASA=evil enterprise, planet X) which ended up with NASA trying to divert an unknown planet with nukes. What is your point?

malaidas
20-March-2009, 04:22 PM
It was rambling for the most part, as I said It didn't turn out as well as I hoped it would. The basics are that the Planet X conspiricy doesn't make any sort of sense, even less than my post :).

There is no explicable reason for them keeping it a secret as without them dying themselves through inaction they couldn't keep the secret.

Sam5
20-March-2009, 04:27 PM
OK here is our CT how do we knock it down... There are numerous easy ways to do it, but I'm going to do it the hard way, by simply applying logical deduction upon the facts as stated which will show that the existence of the Roswell CT makes Planet X highly unlikely and that in the absence of Roswell this CT has no grounds at all, as I said earlier Roswell is the cornerstone on which any NASA conspiricy in the absence of evidence must hang for credibility. There is no direct evidence for Planet X, this is the whole reason why its a conspiricy.


This story could have something to do with the discovery of the asteroid 1566-Icarus in 1949.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1566_Icarus

As a kid I remember this being in the news a little, because some media printed stories about the thing maybe colliding with earth some day. This caused a little panic, and it also caused a couple of Hollywood science fiction movies to be made about it.

The earliest movie was “The Man From Planet X”, in 1951. In that film, a spaceman from the planet was sent to earth to kidnap earthlings. Planet X came near the earth but did not crash into it. This was also the first alien abduction movie, and the first introduction of a “gray”-looking type of alien.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0043778/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h7kEf-rW7ks

The other film was “When Worlds Collide”, in 1951. In that film the earth was destroyed and the last survivors left earth in a large rocket ship.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0044207/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tlChAIfnW1Q

I was in the news business and worked with film and video for many years, and I noticed an interesting phenomenon during my lifetime. Sometimes people can see a film when they are very young, especially one they might see on TV during childhood, while half awake and nodding off to sleep, and then years later they forget that they saw the film and they can think they had some kind of real “memories” of events that actually took place (but that were only in the film). Or, years later, they can think they dreamed of the events in a “prophetic” way, or they can think they acquired the information through some sort of somnambulant “telepathic” method that they don’t quite understand.

I’m old enough to remember the origin of the modern Planet X story. It’s basically based on two 1951 Hollywood science fiction movies.

nauthiz
20-March-2009, 04:29 PM
I just got some ramie and have been having a good time spinning it. It takes a lot of twist so there's a bit of a learning curve, but you can make a good fine yarn that isn't too fuzzy with it.


Oh wait, wrong thread. :silenced:

malaidas
20-March-2009, 04:42 PM
thanks Sam.

I didn;t realise there was an explanatory reason for this delusion. I thought it was just MCCanney trying to make a quick buck off gullible people to fund himself and gain a captive audience for his ATM theories. This was the first I'd heard about the Planet X CT.

Swift
20-March-2009, 04:50 PM
The basics are that the Planet X conspiricy doesn't make any sort of sense, even less than my post :).

There is no explicable reason for them keeping it a secret as without them dying themselves through inaction they couldn't keep the secret.
No, it doesn't make any sort of sense. That doesn't seem to stop certain people from believing.

By the way malaidas, welcome to BAUT.

Gillianren
20-March-2009, 05:19 PM
Since we're mentioning Planet X anyway . . . .

I saw Obama on Leno last night (no, this isn't going to be political), and he mentioned that, the first time they went up in Marine One, he was impressed by the view of the Washington Monument and the sweep of the city laid out below him and so forth. And his daughters' response was more, you know, "Hey, is that Starburst?" And all I could think was, "What if one was unwrapped? Would that mean the Obamas were receiving signs from aliens?"

01101001
20-March-2009, 05:24 PM
[Obama daughter:] "Hey, is that Starburst?" And all I could think was, "What if one was unwrapped? Would that mean the Obamas were receiving signs from aliens?"

I am lacking the cultural literacy to make sense of that. What is the bridge between an unwrapped fruit candy and alien signals?

malaidas
20-March-2009, 05:49 PM
thanks swift, glad to have found it.

Swift
20-March-2009, 05:56 PM
I am lacking the cultural literacy to make sense of that. What is the bridge between an unwrapped fruit candy and alien signals?
Nancy, Ms. Planet X, didn't she claim she had her first revelation from a piece of Starburst candy?

novaderrik
20-March-2009, 06:20 PM
I am lacking the cultural literacy to make sense of that. What is the bridge between an unwrapped fruit candy and alien signals?

the candy is called Starburst...
that can't be a coincidence

[cue X Files theme music]

Gillianren
20-March-2009, 06:58 PM
Nancy, Ms. Planet X, didn't she claim she had her first revelation from a piece of Starburst candy?

Yup. She knew the aliens were really talking to her when she was at the movies and found an unwrapped Starburst in her box of candy.

MartianMarvin
20-March-2009, 07:33 PM
I am lacking the cultural literacy to make sense of that. What is the bridge between an unwrapped fruit candy and alien signals?

Nancy Lieder, a lady who claims to be receiving telepathic communications from Zeta Reticulans (Zetas) which originally warned her about Planet X and the emminent pole shift, claims that her telepathic communications were verified through the means of a sign. That sign, she asserts, was the occasion of finding an unwrapped Starburst candy in a pack she purchased at a movie theater.

In other words, there really isn't one.

KaiYeves
20-March-2009, 07:39 PM
If I found an unwrapped candy in a pack, I'd report it to the candy company. Rather unsanitary, you know?

Extravoice
20-March-2009, 09:32 PM
If I found an unwrapped candy in a pack, I'd report it to the candy company. Rather unsanitary, you know?

If I found an unwrapped candy, I'd simply feed it to my dog. Oh wait, she doesn't have a dog. :whistle: :mad:

Sam5
20-March-2009, 10:26 PM
I just got some ramie and have been having a good time spinning it. It takes a lot of twist so there's a bit of a learning curve, but you can make a good fine yarn that isn't too fuzzy with it.


Oh wait, wrong thread. :silenced:

It took me a while, but I finally got it. :)

Gillianren
20-March-2009, 10:27 PM
If I found an unwrapped candy, I'd simply feed it to my dog. Oh wait, she doesn't have a dog. :whistle: :mad:

She still did at the time . . . .

01101001
21-March-2009, 01:48 AM
Yup. She knew the aliens were really talking to her when she was at the movies and found an unwrapped Starburst in her box of candy.

Ya know I'm kinda glad I formerly lacked the cultural literacy to understand it -- and I wish I could now restore my Starburst naivete to its former pristine state.

I feel so dirty.

LaurelHS
21-March-2009, 02:39 AM
I bought some Starbursts this afternoon and they were all wrapped when I opened the package. I guess the aliens don't want to talk to me. :(

novaderrik
21-March-2009, 06:41 AM
If I found an unwrapped candy in a pack, I'd report it to the candy company. Rather unsanitary, you know?
being the dirtball that i am, i'd eat it- but only if it was a lemon or orange flavored. for me, the "5 second" rule is pretty much the "as long as there isn't hair and stuff on it that won't wipe off" rule.
then i'd call the 800 number on the package and pretend that i was all outraged and get them to send me a bunch of coupons for free stuff.
a little side note- back in '95, the place i worked at made the packaging machines for Starburst. not the machine that wraps the pieces, but the one that puts them in the big package. when the time came to test the machines, the company sent a 30 gallon drum of each of the flavors to run thru it to see if it worked. when they were done, they were supposed to throw it all away- but i got about 5 gallons of the waxy treats. all lemon and orange. yummy.
it was the same situation not even two weeks later when they tested the machines we built to put Pringles in the cans.. i actually can't eat BBQ flavored Pringles to this day after eating about 50 pounds of them over a couple of weeks.

Studioguy
24-March-2009, 02:01 PM
^^^That may be one of the most awesome stories I've ever read.^^^

novaderrik
24-March-2009, 09:43 PM
^^^That may be one of the most awesome stories I've ever read.^^^

which part? the part where i'll eat almost anything that doesn't have anything visible on it, or the part about the Starburst and Pringles?

Studioguy
24-March-2009, 09:52 PM
Definitely the 5 gallon bucket of Starburst and 50 pounds of Pringles. My 5 year old's eyes would pop out if he saw that sight.

Abaddon
25-March-2009, 01:24 AM
I also have been the recipient of the unwrapped starburst.

I have questions.

Am I now as enlightened as nancy?

Am I now a conduit for the zetas?

Does it matter that I ate the said sweet? will the zetas be cross?

Does it matter that I regarded its unwrapped status as a kind of labour saving device?

ah the heck with it, yom yom yom yom yom

Swift
26-March-2009, 03:01 AM
Am I now as enlightened as nancy?

I'm guessing at least twice as enlightened. ;)

glaucoman
01-April-2009, 03:02 PM
I read the Phil's page attacking James McCanney before I got contact with his work, and as I'm someone who prefer to hear both sides of each history, I started to listen to McCanney's weekly radio shows, the new and the old ones and I believe that Phil Blait are not aware regarding McCanneys studies, nor he decided to attack him just to stay on winner's team.

McCanney have some beliefs regarding Planet X because this topic matches his studies, not just because on conspiracy's theories. Also, mainly due to his Electric Space model, he predicted tropical storms, tornados, hurricanes and snow storms months before it happens, and he was right on it's predictions in all of them. And this was not like a "someday in next few months we may got bad weather", but "in day X of month Y we will have hurricanes and tornados, probably snow storms in Z regions", and he always hit the date in the nose. Do you remember that snow storms in begining of this month in USA? He predicted this in December, and even the spaceweather.com didn't realized that untill 3 days before the storm started.

I guess you should spend more time on reading and listening to McCanney books and radio shows even if he is the Phil's archenemy, maybe you can get good news there.

Swift
01-April-2009, 03:16 PM
glaucoman,
First, welcome to BAUT. Second, you should read up on the rules for this forum and in particular those for Against the Mainstream (ATM), Conspiracy Theories (CT) and anything about Electric Universe models (http://www.bautforum.com/against-mainstream/45529-read-first-re-posting-electric-universe-ideas-here.html). You might also want to look at these suggestions (http://www.bautforum.com/conspiracy-theories/86593-advice-conspiracy-theory-supporters.html) for people who are going to advocate such ideas.

R.A.F.
01-April-2009, 03:29 PM
...I believe that Phil Blait are not aware...


Who....???

glaucoman
01-April-2009, 03:49 PM
Hi Swift,

Tks for alerting me! Actually I don't want to open a new thread or discussion on "Against the Mainstream" or in "Conspiracy Theories" because I don't have too much time to discuss, i.e., what I've been founding on McCanneys work. I just posted something that you would like to know regarding his studies: his Electric Space model can predict hurricanes and a sort of other storm conditions. I'm just a Computer Scientist, but I imagine that if you have a model that predicts something, and it works every time you try, probably the model is right, isn't it? But let's avoid this discussion, I know this is not the correct place to do that...

glaucoman
01-April-2009, 03:50 PM
RAF,
Sorry, I mean Phil PLAIT, the owner...

MartianMarvin
01-April-2009, 05:04 PM
Also, mainly due to his Electric Space model, he predicted tropical storms, tornados, hurricanes and snow storms months before it happens, and he was right on it's predictions in all of them. And this was not like a "someday in next few months we may got bad weather", but "in day X of month Y we will have hurricanes and tornados, probably snow storms in Z regions", and he always hit the date in the nose. Do you remember that snow storms in begining of this month in USA? He predicted this in December, and even the spaceweather.com didn't realized that untill 3 days before the storm started.

Hi, glaucoman. I'm a little wary of responding to someone who's joined and posted these claims on April Fool's Day, but here I go, anyway.

I find it interesting that you claim such extreme accuracy (event or events T,U,V, day X, month Y, place Z) in McCanney's predictions and yet so underwhelmingly general with the example provided. Snow storms in the USA in the beginning of March? This is little better than "someday in next few months we may got bad weather" It would have been better to have included evidence of McCanney's prediction given in December, as well as confirmation of the specific event or events, dates, and affected places. For starters, please provide this information.

glaucoman
01-April-2009, 06:44 PM
Hi Martian,
Unnafortunatly, I didn't took notes from McCanney's shows (I know I should), but I promise that I will do that sooner in a new thread on correct forum, because I don't want to be banned again before I start... they did it to me in some brazilian forums for such problems and I don't want it again =D.

But I mentioned such snow storm in March (actually starting some days earlier in February), because McCanney predicted, in December, severe weather due to electrical connections between Sun, Mars, Earth, New Moon and comet Lulin starting around February 27th. If you got the tracks for weather previsions made on weather services around this date, you will (as I did), see that nobody was reporting nothing then some little snow in some places, but just in 24th's evening they reported a severe winter weater formation upper USA midwest and growing. In February 27th, the storm spreaded through USA and all kinds of huge storms formed worldwide. You can check in following link where you would find McCanney's posts for this topic: http://www.jmccsci.com/thought%20of%20the%20day.HTM. After that, look for "February 24, 2009 posting ... 8 PM CDT" and the following ones. You will not like the way he writes, but be patient.

MartianMarvin
02-April-2009, 04:21 PM
I think this is a step in the right direction, at least. What's your definition of "upper USA midwest?" What events are included in severe weather? What dates are included in the range "starting around February 27th?" These are all still quite general.

Also, a nitpick: as of Feb. 24th, the US was still observing standard time (EST, CST, etc.) , observation of daylight savings time (EDT, CDT, MDT, etc.) didn't begin until March 8th. However, for now I'll accept that this is probably a limitation of the website.

glaucoman
06-April-2009, 04:27 PM
Hi Martian,

I started a new thread to discuss this on "Against the Mainstream". As soon as the administrator aproves my message, I will post the link here.


Regards!

glaucoman
06-April-2009, 06:31 PM
As promised:
http://www.bautforum.com/against-mainstream/86870-weather-predictions-james-mccanney.html

glaucoman
06-April-2009, 06:57 PM
Unfortunatly my topic was closed by administrators. I'm in touch with Antoniseb to try to bring my post back.

MartianMarvin
06-April-2009, 07:53 PM
I'm sorry to hear that, glaucoman, but for the most part, the moderators have pretty good reasons to close a thread - I wouldn't be surprised at all if McCanney's EU model has already been discussed at length on these forums. Even so, if it turns out that you can't re-open that thread, it might still be possible to continue this discussion within certain parameters.

glaucoman
07-April-2009, 12:11 PM
I don't think so, I could not find any topic related to weather conditions and Electric Space in this forum. I hope Antoniseb to consider that.

Van Rijn
08-April-2009, 01:11 AM
I wouldn't be surprised at all if McCanney's EU model has already been discussed at length on these forums.


McCanney has come up from time to time, and the BA has a page on him:

http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/misc/mccanney/index.html

one bit is on hurricane predictions:

http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/misc/mccanney/misc.html#hurricanes

My guess is that the mods don't consider another thread on McCanney & EU to be appropriate.

glaucoman
08-April-2009, 12:36 PM
Phil Plait was wrong it its assumptions regarding hurricanes in McCanney model. According to McCanney, the high seasons of hurricanes occurs on August due to an electrical flux that occurs accross the Solar System always in same place, where Earth passes and the hurricanes season occurs in Northern hemisphere. But, as you could expect for an electric circuit, the same electrical flux passes accross oposite side of the first one, where Earth passes In February, triggering the Cyclone and Typhoons season on South hemisphere.

One more point: McCanney does not predict anything regarding Planet X. Such electrical connections occurs on August and February, and when Earth connects to another planet or comet. Planet X, according to McCanney is any planet to be discovered in our Solar System. So, Eris was a Planet X type object until its discovery was confirmed.

But, if you are talking about Nibiru, you have to know that, according to McCanney, Nibiru is not Planet X, Nibiru is Nibiru, and most probably nobody knows where it is or when it will get back. To believe in Nibiru is very different to prove its existance.

One more thing: the only way to check Phil's assumptions regarding McCanney's model is by listening to all of his past radio shows. Even to buy his books is optional, because just by listening to his radio shows you will got the same knowledge regarding its model to a guy that is just starting to explore amateur astronomy.

MartianMarvin
08-April-2009, 04:38 PM
I'm not sure where the moderators will draw the line, but if you insist on continuing this discussion, please answer the questions I asked in post #34.
What's your definition of "upper USA midwest?" What events are included in severe weather? What dates are included in the range "starting around February 27th?"

Gillianren
08-April-2009, 04:56 PM
Phil Plait was wrong it its assumptions regarding hurricanes in McCanney model. According to McCanney, the high seasons of hurricanes occurs on August due to an electrical flux that occurs accross the Solar System always in same place, where Earth passes and the hurricanes season occurs in Northern hemisphere. But, as you could expect for an electric circuit, the same electrical flux passes accross oposite side of the first one, where Earth passes In February, triggering the Cyclone and Typhoons season on South hemisphere.

His. And how do you respond to the conventional model of hurricane formation?

One more thing: the only way to check Phil's assumptions regarding McCanney's model is by listening to all of his past radio shows. Even to buy his books is optional, because just by listening to his radio shows you will got the same knowledge regarding its model to a guy that is just starting to explore amateur astronomy.

I suggest you check out Phil's resume.

NEOWatcher
08-April-2009, 05:04 PM
I suggest you check out Phil's resume.
That's the point, he's so busy being a professional, credited and respected astronomer, he doesn't have time for exploring the amateurs. :p

tusenfem
08-April-2009, 05:27 PM
According to McCanney, the high seasons of hurricanes occurs on August due to an electrical flux that occurs accross the Solar System always in same place, where Earth passes and the hurricanes season occurs in Northern hemisphere. But, as you could expect for an electric circuit, the same electrical flux passes accross oposite side of the first one, where Earth passes In February, triggering the Cyclone and Typhoons season on South hemisphere.



glaucoman, your McCanney thread was closed, and will only be opened if you have any real proof of these electric circuits, like observations.

Do NOT come with this bunk outside ATM. You are warned.

To others: McCanney's theories will not be discussed here.

glaucoman
08-April-2009, 06:58 PM
glaucoman, your McCanney thread was closed, and will only be opened if you have any real proof of these electric circuits, like observations.

Do NOT come with this bunk outside ATM. You are warned.

To others: McCanney's theories will not be discussed here.


Unlocked? Thanks Tusen, as you will see I'm providing the proofs that McCanney did the prediction and the prediction occured on time, place and flavour and the explanations make sense. So, please do not forget to check my sources!

glaucoman
08-April-2009, 06:59 PM
His. And how do you respond to the conventional model of hurricane formation?



I suggest you check out Phil's resume.

Gillianren,

According to my understand on Electric Space, the current hurricane formation model is wrong because the required energy to trigger an hurricane is too big and too localized to be supplied by hot water. If you count electric conditions in the ionosphere and it's interactions towards the atmosphere, so an electric discharge could provide sufficient energy to trigger the hurricane. And electric discharges triggering hurricanes is known by NASA scientists, according to this Spaceflight (http://www.spaceflightnow.com/news/n0404/20marsdust/) release. Mars is cold, don't have water, have a tiny atmosphere and a small electromagnetic field, but he could create an hurricane bigger than our earthlings ones.

Now imagine a big electrical discharge from Sun to outer space crossing all the Solar System always in the same place, and Earth passes through this discharge two times per year. In this case the electrical connection is large bigger and hurricanes are bigger and more frequent during this passage.

According to Phil's resume... you don't have to aware me that he is a boss on JPL, I'm just stating that he don't took suficient attention to what McCanney said regarding the hurricane season. And you can see in my post that Phil didn't consider the electrical discharge crossing both sides of the Solar System, resolving the problem on McCanney's model he stated regarding the hurricane season in North Hemisphere and Typhoon season in South Hemisphere. Even God made mistakes, so I always check.

Swift
08-April-2009, 07:14 PM
Unlocked? Thanks Tusen, as you will see I'm providing the proofs that McCanney did the prediction and the prediction occured on time, place and flavour and the explanations make sense. So, please do not forget to check my sources!
glaucoman,
This thread is not for further discussion of your ATM ideas and I am closing it.

tusenfem instructions for you were to post any real proof of the electrical currents proposed by the electric universe model, which you have not done.

Similarly, antoniseb closed your ATM thread (http://www.bautforum.com/against-mainstream/86870-weather-predictions-james-mccanney.html) as something that has been discussed many, many times in the past.

If you have any new information, please PM a moderator or an administrator as to what new information you have and we'll see about reopening the ATM thread.

Added - ATM thread on this topic is now reopened.