Large Hadron Collider. What do YOU think it is?

[takhisis]

Originally Posted by halleyscomet

First of all, there's no such term as "Nasty Gravity" in physics. I don't know where you got such a term, but if it came from Haramein he's more of a bullshit artist than I thought. What field of physics are you talking about? Most of the equations you're so eager to dismiss are based upon real world observations. The POINT of physics is to use math to describe observed phenomena. Those equations are then used to do something interesting or useful. If modern physics were as flawed as Haramein claims we wouldn't be able to put satellites in orbit. Computers would never have been possible.



Any good physicist will admit there are things we don't know, but being incomplete does not make a theory inaccurate. The constants used in physics are based largely upon observation and study. Yes, there are situations where physicists don't know why a particular constant is a given value, but all the experiments they've done indicate the constant is accurate. The fact that there are things still unknown does not justify abandoning all of modern physics in favor of Haramein's claims, particularly when he provides no real way of testing his theories. He uses a "God of the gaps" methodology, claiming that because there are holes in modern physics, his theories must be better. What he gleefully ignores is the fact that science demands you provide a way to TEST theories. A physics model is useless if there's no way to use it to make testable predictions.



He has no experiments or equations to back up his theories. "Science" necessitates experiments, not just theories. The math you so freely dismiss happens to be critical to actual science. Anyone who claims to be a scientist but is dismissive of the math involved in their discipline is, quite frankly, a fraud and a charlatan.



The fact that you find his claims easier to digest than what you've heard in the popular press about physics does not mean his claims more more accurate. The real world happens to be fairly complex.



I'd LOVE a link to that video. I'd also like to know WHO claimed Planet X was supposed to be coming near.



Since crop circles are the work of human pranksters, it's reasonable to suspect a few of those pranksters tried to encode some messages in them.



I'll take a look, but until there are competently done experiments to test his theories, it will remain theoretical, philosophical yammering.

May have been Nasty Mass or Nasty Gravity all in his video with research and documentation to back up all these claim's, Also you have NO proof ALL crop circles are fake, in fact one of the most famous crop circles just happened to appear next the transmitter next to a military installation , in a downpour there is no possiable WAY that could of been constructed overnight next to a military installation in downpour overnight next to the transmition tower that sent a signal out in search of life, its all in his 45 part lecture on youtube even the video , showing the sun and the comet , just need to watch it.

Its also quite amusing i find the Vatican to be the only ones in the world to have telescope lens that are made to view the sun

Also there is no planet X , it was a comet that almost smashed into the sun it wasnt on the media , but there was footage of it, i beleve the planet X thing was just disinfo , so people would be looking for that and not notice the comet that barly missed the sun

PS a majority of the crop circle are fake no doubt , but there are the first few that are legit

[hagbard_celine]

Originally Posted by halleyscomet

Nexus is just another government misinformation project. It's "information" is more often than not designed to mislead people than enlighten them. The general idea is to lead people down dead ends and fruitless paths to keep them from probing too deeply into the truth. It's about as reliable as the Weekly World News, but not nearly as entertaining.

Are you sure. I know Marcus Allen personally and find him a genuine guy. His daughter and other members of his family help him publish Nexus in Britain.

I wasn't arguing that it was perfectly safe. I'm arguing that there's no reason to believe there's some conspiracy to mislead the people involved into building a doomsday device. "Being more dangerous than the designers think" does NOT equal "Designed or influenced by a secret cabal intent upon destroying the world."

Who is claiming there's some secret organization or group directing science to build a doomsday device? The fact that you find it a plausible theory doesn't automatically make it true, or even feasible.

I'm not saying it definitely is true. But at the same time I disagree with people like Dr Brian Cox who say it is definitely not true. This man compared disbelieving in the moon-landings to disbelieing in the discovery of America.

Besides, wouldn't it make more sense to rule an existing population rather than destroy the planet? Wouldn't it make sense to say, create a misinformation campaign to convince people that anti-viral inoculations are dangerous? Once that belief takes hold all you need to do is wait for a few measles outbreaks wipe out folks who prefer alternative news sources. Wouldn't it make more sense to infiltrate the very people who could pose a threat and lay the groundwork for them to kill themselves off, but leave the rest of the population relatively untouched?

Yes, it would make far more sense, but as I've explained on other threads, this is not the issue with the LHC. We have to consider how the Illuminati wold react if they were ever in a situation where they couldn't rule us, a situation where their "Great Work of the Ages" came a cropper. These people believe they are Gods! They've never contemplated failure before! This is why when faced with it they would go into what I call a "Gotterdammerung" state of mind. It woild no longer be a choice of a free world or thie world, it would be a choice of free world or NO world at all. They would far rather wipe the world, or even the whole universeout of existance than let free men and women have it.

[amabus]

http://www.scientificconcerns.com/Forums/

This used to be a forum strictly for LHC concerns and now addresses that plus other issues. It's worth a look for anyone interested in the LHC.

I also ran across this the other night:

The March 2009 issue of Astronomy magazine discusses how certain spacecraft aren't following our current theory of gravity...
January 28, 2009
WAUKESHA, Wis. — For centuries, Sir Isaac Newton's law of gravity, coupled later with Albert Einstein's general theory of relativity, provided scientists with their basic understanding of gravity. But today, a number of cosmic oddities is showing astronomers they know less about gravity than they thought. The astronomical unit, a supposed constant, seems to be increasing, while the Pioneer spacecraft that launched in the early 1970s are closer to Earth than they should be.

"One thought is that a new physics will explain these observed gravity mysteries," Anderson said. "Maybe astronomy is already experiencing a transformation to a new physics, or at least a new theory of gravity."

http://www.astronomy.com/asy/default.aspx?c=a&id=7875

[hagbard_celine]

Originally Posted by amabus

http://www.scientificconcerns.com/Forums/

This used to be a forum strictly for LHC concerns and now addresses that plus other issues. It's worth a look for anyone interested in the LHC.

I also ran across this the other night:

The March 2009 issue of Astronomy magazine discusses how certain spacecraft aren't following our current theory of gravity...
January 28, 2009
WAUKESHA, Wis. — For centuries, Sir Isaac Newton's law of gravity, coupled later with Albert Einstein's general theory of relativity, provided scientists with their basic understanding of gravity. But today, a number of cosmic oddities is showing astronomers they know less about gravity than they thought. The astronomical unit, a supposed constant, seems to be increasing, while the Pioneer spacecraft that launched in the early 1970s are closer to Earth than they should be.

"One thought is that a new physics will explain these observed gravity mysteries," Anderson said. "Maybe astronomy is already experiencing a transformation to a new physics, or at least a new theory of gravity."

http://www.astronomy.com/asy/default.aspx?c=a&id=7875

Thanks for the link, but something tells me I wouldn't really fit in on that forum.

The anomalies with gravity are something I'm looking into too. These old space probes are the only man-made objects transmitting radio waves from beyond the solar system and it seems that the laws of physics might be different out there to what they are down here. I read the brilliant book Dark Moon- Apollo and the Whistleblowers by David Percy and Mary Bennett where they discuss the idea that the sped of light is variable, rather than fixed as was claimed by Einstein. This has since been backed up by a Cambridge physicist called Joao Myguashu (spelling?) and was in a TV show called Einstein's Biggest Blunder where it talks about his rejection of his own theory of the Cosmological Constant.

Fookin' Hell! Here it is!: http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...iggest+blunder I thought it was never going to be Google Video'ed! This is a must-watch!

How this ties in with the LHC? What do you reckon?

[amabus]

Originally Posted by hagbard_celine

Thanks for the link, but something tells me I wouldn't really fit in on that forum.

The anomalies with gravity are something I'm looking into too. These old space probes are the only man-made objects transmitting radio waves from beyond the solar system and it seems that the laws of physics might be different out there to what they are down here. I read the brilliant book Dark Moon- Apollo and the Whistleblowers by David Percy and Mary Bennett where they discuss the idea that the sped of light is variable, rather than fixed as was claimed by Einstein. This has since been backed up by a Cambridge physicist called Joao Myguashu (spelling?) and was in a TV show called Einstein's Biggest Blunder where it talks about his rejection of his own theory of the Cosmological Constant.

Fookin' Hell! Here it is!: http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...iggest+blunder I thought it was never going to be Google Video'ed! This is a must-watch!

How this ties in with the LHC? What do you reckon?

That IS a must-watch video. I'm so glad you found it. I'd be interested in anything you've found on gravity as well.

[cruise4]

I think they are reproducing some aspect of DNA on a far larger scale with a view to gaining access to somewhere.

[hagbard_celine]

Originally Posted by amabus

That IS a must-watch video. I'm so glad you found it. I'd be interested in anything you've found on gravity as well.

Cheers, I'll have a look.

I bet the physicists employed by the Illuminati will alreadyt know about this. This could change everything and make the LHC not work at all in the way its builders intended. But will it still produce mini black holes and strangelets?