Thats No Moon, thats a Space Station - David Icke's new book.

[nustada]

yup. It really is funny to me that alot of people nay say the reptilian "research" as if the mainstream religion of the US is not rife with this kind of thing , the snake/serpent/dragon etc decieving mankind...

Except the fruit in the bible account was not an apple, or any other fruit we know of. And probably is largely symbolic to illustrate the act of defiance.

[Freeski]

I am just wondering what if momentum, mass and velocity, might create a field that is very weak, like on the quantum or plank scale. But had a very large area of effect, or field loop. The field opposes gravity, or is gravity but of the opposite polarity. The field is difficult or impossible to observe on small scale experiments due to it potential divided over a massive area, and relative weakness. But on a galactic scale, it causes object with massive speed and velocity to repel each other.

As a small scale comparison, when electrons move, they create an electromagnetic field, however it is reverse, meaning if the electron stops and the field collapses, it would be pushed back in the opposite direction. In the presence of an electromagnetic field, and electron accelerates, but in its own velocity it generates its own electric field that counteracts the motive one, this is generally termed as "back EMF".

Also if one wanted to create and anti gravity motor. assuming the above is correct, one would need to accelerate a significant mass to near the speed of light in a confined space. The only way to do that would be in a frictionless confined space. The only "natural" frictionless material are certain liquids at near zero Kelvin, and the only way the I can think of to accelerate it would be by a magnetic field in a toroid. The major problem, that is not yet demonstrated would be how prevent the container from exploding as a result of the centrifugal forces.

Thank you. Much better!

[Freeski]

Except the fruit in the bible account was not an apple, or any other fruit we know of. And probably is largely symbolic to illustrate the act of defiance.

Who the f**k knows anything when everything* is bullshit!

* well, not "everything" - "love" is cool!

But who!

[nustada]

Who the f**k knows anything when everything* is bullshit!

* well, not "everything" - "love" is cool!

But who!

Its in the book, I didn't say I knew what was there, only that it says humanity was denied access to the tree that produced the fruit, which means it could not be an apple or any other known fruit. In fact by me saying probably symbolic, is that there are a lot of technical problems with the story, and if I knew there would be no probability about it.

Its not like you have to be a genius, its explicitly stated in the third chapter of genesis.

[Freeski]

Its not like you have to be a genius, its explicitly stated in the third chapter of genesis.

What is stated?

[nustada]

What is stated?

Read it and find out.

http://bible.cc/genesis/3-22.htm

Last time I checked, we eat plenty of apples.

[Freeski]

Read it and find out.

http://bible.cc/genesis/3-22.htm

Last time I checked, we eat plenty of apples.

How is this not cryptic?

New International Version (©1984)

And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever."

[nustada]

How is this not cryptic?

New International Version (©1984)

And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever."

It is cryptic, but it isn't an apple.

[Djævlen]

Actually, I agree with Hoagland about the infiltration of the space agency by occultists.  If you look at his ideas about the universe, reality and humanity, you will see, however, they are informed by the same occult sources.

agreed with the first statement, however i disagree with your take on his views of the world an humanity. i've been following his work for about 17 years and he champions human freedom, development and is anti NWO. to label his views "theosophical" is shortsighted and sounds like christian condemnation.

also for the record, i dont agree with everything Hoagland proposes - most of it is completely unverifiable - one mans interpretation of some grainy photos and esoteric "data". my main interest lies in the aforementioned subject regarding Parsons, Crowley, Nazi scientists and the like - fascinating shit!!

[Freeski]

agreed with the first statement, however i disagree with your take on his views of the world an humanity. i've been following his work for about 17 years and he champions human freedom, development and is anti NWO. to label his views "theosophical" is shortsighted and sounds like christian condemnation.

also for the record, i dont agree with everything Hoagland proposes - most of it is completely unverifiable - one mans interpretation of some grainy photos and esoteric "data". my main interest lies in the aforementioned subject regarding Parsons, Crowley, Nazi scientists and the like - fascinating shit!!

I like the cut of your jib! Whatever the hell that means!

[Djævlen]

I like the cut of your jib! Whatever the hell that means!

thanks!.......I think......

here is a series of cool vids on the topic http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AiBSHcZ5lkI&feature=related

[Freeski]

thanks!.......I think......

here is a series of cool vids on the topic http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AiBSHcZ5lkI&feature=related

Ugh... not more, a dude needs some non brainblowing stuff from time to time, too!

It's a type of "bump".

[citizenx]

agreed with the first statement, however i disagree with your take on his views of the world an humanity. i've been following his work for about 17 years and he champions human freedom, development and is anti NWO. to label his views "theosophical" is shortsighted and sounds like christian condemnation.

also for the record, i dont agree with everything Hoagland proposes - most of it is completely unverifiable - one mans interpretation of some grainy photos and esoteric "data". my main interest lies in the aforementioned subject regarding Parsons, Crowley, Nazi scientists and the like - fascinating shit!!

I'm not a Christian.  I am, for all practical purposes, an atheist.  You're on the wrong track as far as your suspicions about me are concerned.

[iks83]

About Hoagland. I bought his book and there is nothing new in there that you dont already find on his websites. So look there and save the 30 bucks. I said it here on the forum several times. His stories are fascinating and gets you all excited about the possibilities. But after I read his book I did some very simple research to see if what he says can stand a bit of scrutiny. First thing I though... if that background noise on those photos are ruins of a huge dome, it should line up with panorama shots composed of several pictures. Guess what the background didnt even come close to alignment so the background noise is just as expected a noise caused by the digitalization of the picture. And I went to the sources he claims have the undoctored photos. I also looked through the archives to find more pictures where there is the same kind of background noise he claims are ruins of glass domes. And funny enough I found one from the same area with the same kind of noise but here it was over the whole page meaning also in the foreground over the bright moon surface on the photo. Another confirmation that his glass ruins are nothing more than artifacts caused by the scanning process of the picture. I can try to dig that stuff up if someone is interested.
Also the same source has the pictures of the cable that is lying on a hill... which kinda looks like someone slipped with the blur tool in photoshop or a hair from a brush got between the photo and the scanner. Of course simple explanations that make more sense and are 1000000x more probable seem to escape Hoaglands vision. Therefore all his talk about how he run the images through filters and blabla to see if the stuff is genuine is just hoagwash. If someone gets even the little things wrong, doesnt see the obvious errors or the obvious ways to check the valitity of his claims then you certainly cant trust anything more complex he is talking about.

[Michal Ptacnik]

True, this has never quite added up for me, the Hoagland's domes. I guess everyone needs to have an income and this is Richard's way to make profit... I long for the days when truth is no longer a commodity interchangeable with money...

[Djævlen]

I'm not a Christian.  I am, for all practical purposes, an atheist.  You're on the wrong track as far as your suspicions about me are concerned.

ok, my bad then.

as soon as someone around here throws around the terms "new age" and "theosophist", i get suspicious of their motives.

[citizenx]

No problem.

[Kilgore Trout]

Except the fruit in the bible account was not an apple, or any other fruit we know of. And probably is largely symbolic to illustrate the act of defiance.

I know , I didn't specifically address the apple because of that. It might be worth it to mention that when you cut open a certain apple the inner core reveals the elemental symbol of the pentagram. I've also heard the pentagram described as man , like the DaVinci figure , how it makes a pentagram shape.

[Michal Ptacnik]

Pentagram upwards is the symbol of Man being a servant, literally a member of the "body of" spirit, e.g. it is not Satanic in the slightest. Pentagram downwards is the symbol of materialism and would very well characterize the typical person living in these times.

Of course there are other representations but this is kinda occult mainstream nowadays, as far as I know and as far as an "occult mainstream" exists...

[Unintelligable Name]

the snake/serpent/dragon etc decieving mankind...

The serpent told the truth. God lied -- but the story doesn't say why. The story of manipulation, "Lucifer," etc is like Bible lore... it isn't really there. Gnostics are just are off base as most Christians and Jews. "Lucifer is good," "Lucifer is bad," Ahem, Lucifer ain't jack shit, it's a total misnomer. It's like....... oh I don't know, think of your own example. How about the 2012 prophecy, it's like that. Even though none of it is based in reality (as in not actually true, but real as to the story) both are still dangerous doctrines. Lizard people, anyone?

*disappears*

[Kilgore Trout]

thanks!.......I think......

here is a series of cool vids on the topic http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AiBSHcZ5lkI&feature=related

Awesome video series! People with something negative to say about Hoagland , please be sure to watch these videos and note how the man asks questions and fears a police state as well...

[Freeski]

Awesome video series! People with something negative to say about Hoagland , please be sure to watch these videos and note how the man asks questions and fears a police state as well...

bump for later - Note to self: I meant to check into this.

[iks83]

Awesome video series! People with something negative to say about Hoagland , please be sure to watch these videos and note how the man asks questions and fears a police state as well...

Well just read his Hyperdimensional election of Barack Obama or whatever the article was. That guy is a total sucker. Like his praising of Bush for lip service about the space program. Or praising Obama for his lip service about the space program. Cheering because Lord Obama wanted to increase the budged... hahaha we know how that turned out. How can you trust a guy that is totally wrong on so many issues?

[Georgiacopguy]

Well just read his Hyperdimensional election of Barack Obama or whatever the article was. That guy is a total sucker. Like his praising of Bush for lip service about the space program. Or praising Obama for his lip service about the space program. Cheering because Lord Obama wanted to increase the budged... hahaha we know how that turned out. How can you trust a guy that is totally wrong on so many issues?

• Well, he also said he was a curator of a museum early in his life in massachusetts, which he wasn't.
• He also said he was a consultant to CBS during the Apollo missions...which he wasn't
• He also has no scientific training.

So he's a BUSH/MAOBAMA worshipper so long as they spout wind about the space program, and he a liar. that makes him just as bad as Icke in my book.  I've never liked either of them because they were too fringe in my opinion, I’ve never been able to verify anything either of them has said. I tried giving Icke the benefit of the doubt about 6 months ago, because he seemed to be going through a phase where he wasn’t spouting space alien nonsense, but was focusing on more earthbound issues. That too changed. But Hoagland; his head has always been in the space dust. The Coast to Coasties worship and adore him, so that is indicator one he needs to be given a wide berth, because I’ve heard so much disinfo come through that network, it’s sickening.

[Djævlen]

• Well, he also said he was a curator of a museum early in his life in massachusetts, which he wasn't.
• He also said he was a consultant to CBS during the Apollo missions...which he wasn't
• He also has no scientific training.

Link? Proof?

[Georgiacopguy]

Link? Proof?

NOW you space kiddies want proof? NOW something has to be proven in front of your eyes??? Kinda kypocritical arent ya? Certainly FAR from consistent.

Haven't been able to dredge up anything online other than wiki so far, which is not MY original source, but a phone call to the Museum in Springfield, Mass and after speaking to several people, no one was familiar with his name, save for one who stated, and I quote, " We have verified on multiple occassions he has not ever been a curator with this museum." and hung up.

And I seriously doubt that CBS would have an online list of their consultants back in that era. So far, in all of my searches to date, the ONLY references of Hoaglands CBS accounts, are him and his own sources. As for his proof for his scientific background, it's never played out, nobody I know of has ever been able to prove his own words.

[Djævlen]

NOW you space kiddies want proof? NOW something has to be proven in front of your eyes??? Kinda kypocritical arent ya? Certainly FAR from consistent.

yes, i want proof of your assertions that Hoagland was NOT a CBS correspondent or curator of a museum or that he has NOT had any scientific training. and for the record, I do not buy into all that he proposes, its just interesting fodder. His research on JPL/Crowley/NASA isnt his work alone and can be independently verified. His moon/Mars stuff on the other hand.......

[Georgiacopguy]

yes, i want proof of your assertions that Hoagland was NOT a CBS correspondent or curator of a museum or that he has NOT had any scientific training. and for the record, I do not buy into all that he proposes, its just interesting fodder. His research on JPL/Crowley/NASA isnt his work alone and can be independently verified. His moon/Mars stuff on the other hand.......

Well as I've said, I've had problems proving those assertions on my own. But they raise enough of a reasonable doubt in my mind that I refuse to beleive a single word that crosses his lips or fingers until I can prove otherwise, or their is independant proof of HIS assertions.

[iks83]

yes, i want proof of your assertions that Hoagland was NOT a CBS correspondent or curator of a museum or that he has NOT had any scientific training. and for the record, I do not buy into all that he proposes, its just interesting fodder. His research on JPL/Crowley/NASA isnt his work alone and can be independently verified. His moon/Mars stuff on the other hand.......

Why dont you proof that he was all those things? Contact him... good luck with that. Back then I tried and I was quite nice, just showing the discrepancies and what he makes of them... no reply of course.

[Djævlen]

Why dont you proof that he was all those things? Contact him... good luck with that. Back then I tried and I was quite nice, just showing the discrepancies and what he makes of them... no reply of course.

because its not MY assertion, its Hoaglands. i'm not the one trying to discredit him.

[Georgiacopguy]

because its not MY assertion, its Hoaglands. i'm not the one trying to discredit him.

But you will obviously take anything he says as gospel. Enjoy the koolaid.

[Djævlen]

But you will obviously take anything he says as gospel. Enjoy the koolaid.

lie and exaggerate much??

if you read my f**king post, where i said "i dont agree with a lot of what he proposes", it would have saved you some time typing....jesus h christ.

[rogue raider]

Funny how many people throw stones and pass judgement here,out of all places...
So who has read the book?

[Georgiacopguy]

lie and exaggerate much??

if you read my f**king post, where i said "i dont agree with a lot of what he proposes", it would have saved you some time typing....jesus h christ.

I did read your post, and I think to give that man the benefit of a doubt on ANYTHING is a waste of time and thought, and an insult to critical thinkers everywhere. He's dininfo, pure and simple. He's a liar, and trying to rake in as much cash as long as the gravy train will roll on biscuit wheels. Unfortuantely, there are plenty of gullible people out there that will allow him to do that very thing, throwing their hard earned cash at him too.

Funny how many people throw stones and pass judgement here,out of all places...
So who has read the book?

So because we are on Prisonplanet.com, we should stop being critical thinkers? We should just fall into the group think of a few talkign heads and take them at every word? If they want to say it, they better prove it, and if they do not, or refuse, then there is simply no need to listen to them.

[Djævlen]

I did read your post, and I think to give that man the benefit of a doubt on ANYTHING is a waste of time and thought, and an insult to critical thinkers everywhere. He's dininfo, pure and simple. He's a liar, and trying to rake in as much cash as long as the gravy train will roll on biscuit wheels. Unfortuantely, there are plenty of gullible people out there that will allow him to do that very thing, throwing their hard earned cash at him too.

So because we are on Prisonplanet.com, we should stop being critical thinkers? We should just fall into the group think of a few talkign heads and take them at every word? If they want to say it, they better prove it, and if they do not, or refuse, then there is simply no need to listen to them.

fair enough, but it seems the "conspiracy culture" is big business these days and MANY people are cashing in, including Alex.

[rogue raider]

I did read your post, and I think to give that man the benefit of a doubt on ANYTHING is a waste of time and thought, and an insult to critical thinkers everywhere. He's dininfo, pure and simple. He's a liar, and trying to rake in as much cash as long as the gravy train will roll on biscuit wheels. Unfortuantely, there are plenty of gullible people out there that will allow him to do that very thing, throwing their hard earned cash at him too.

So because we are on Prisonplanet.com, we should stop being critical thinkers? We should just fall into the group think of a few talkign heads and take them at every word? If they want to say it, they better prove it, and if they do not, or refuse, then there is simply no need to listen to them.

Critical thinking?

[Georgiacopguy]

fair enough, but it seems the "conspiracy culture" is big business these days and MANY people are cashing in, including Alex.

Well, the difference between Alex, Icke, and Hoagland, is that Alex won't say something he cannot prove, whereas the other two make it up as they go along. Based on that alone, I feel okay in thinking that Alex should be able to cash in on what he says, because he is making an effort to be truthful and dilligent, as well as responsible to his cause.

[Georgiacopguy]

Critical thinking?

Oh thats right, you're a kool aid drinker, what was I thinking...Of course you don't know what that means. critical analysis: disciplined intellectual criticism that combines research, evidence, knowledge of historical context, common sense and balanced judgment to reach an ultimate conclusion.

[Djævlen]

Well, the difference between Alex, Icke, and Hoagland, is that Alex won't say something he cannot prove, whereas the other two make it up as they go along. Based on that alone, I feel okay in thinking that Alex should be able to cash in on what he says, because he is making an effort to be truthful and dilligent, as well as responsible to his cause.

except for the fact that he believes in the "Cosmic Jewish Zombie", demons, angels, and the like 

[Georgiacopguy]

except for the fact that he believes in the "Cosmic Jewish Zombie", demons, angels, and the like 

Welll, from my standpoint, I've never gotten the impression that he pushes that as a doctrine or philospohy of belief. It's his personal belief. He may mention it in passing, but I do not recall shows dedicated strictly to it, books dedicated strictly to it, or him giving speeches strictly adhereing ot those thoughts. The other two schmucks do.