This is what Joseph Dwyer, an atmospheric researcher from the University of New Hampshire, warns on the blog of the American Geophysical Union
While we are suffering from a heat wave that was unprecedented in its scope, there are those who want us not to know what caused it and other difficult events (the snow on the West Coast of the USA, drought in the West), in particular when the existing satellites are out of use, because some are worried that new ones will not be built in their place.
Are the members of the US Senate Science Committee hiding their eyes with their hands? The committee, headed by Republican Senator Barry Loudermilk of Georgia, a recognized climate denier, seeks to increase NASA's budget for the study of the planets in the solar system at the expense of the budgets intended for the study of the Earth.
Prof. Joseph Dwyer (Dwyer) from the Department of Physics and from the Center for Space Sciences at the Institute for the Study of Earth, Oceans and Space at the University of New Hampshire, published yesterday (27/5/2015) a post On the blog of the American Geophysical Society (American Geophysical Union -AGU) and in it he warns against the change.
Under the heading "Should NASA explore the Earth" Dwyer writes: "Last spring, Congress made a number of changes that may affect NASA's order of priorities, in the direction of reducing the agency's Earth science activities."
"For example, in a hearing held on March 12, several members of the Senate Space, Science and Competitiveness Committee demanded from NASA Administrator Charles Bolden that NASA shift its attention from Earth science to space exploration and research in areas they claim are NASA's core And they are the ones who will inspire future generations of scientists and engineers."
"Furthermore, by saying that NASA "needs to get back to hard science," the chairman of the subcommittee, Senator Ted Cruz, is basically saying that Earth science is not "hard science" like the other subjects supported by NASA."
"Then, in April the House Science and Technology Committee voted on a regulation to redefine NASA's role in 2016/17 that would significantly cut funding for Earth science programs. In addition, just last week, the House Appropriations Committee passed its proposal to the NASA budget "The Commerce, Justice and Science Appropriation Regulation to add funding to NASA's Planetary Science Division, which will come directly from the Earth Science budget cut." The full Congress needs to vote on these regulations and the Senate will soon begin working on its own version of the appropriations regulation."
Should NASA explore the Earth? Dwyer asks, adding that Bolden provided an eloquent answer during a Senate hearing in March, reminding senators that Earth science was part of the agency's mission and that NASA's role in launching Earth-exploring satellites is important to understanding our planet.
Following that meeting, Christine McEntee, CEO of the American Geophysical Association, emphasized these points in an open letter which she sent to Senator Cruz, and later to the House of Representatives in response to the regulation to reorganize the purposes of NASA.
"Since I have conducted research in the field of astrophysics, space physics and earth sciences and have studied fields that extend from deep space to the surface of the earth, I have an unusual perspective on NASA's research and therefore I would like to share some insights on the subject. I can say firsthand that earth sciences are "hard sciences" just like the other fields of physics such as astrophysics and space physics. Those involved in earth sciences use the same scientific methods and follow the same standards as in the other fields. Moreover, those involved in earth science often publish their research in the same peer-reviewed journals in which space scientists and planetary scientists also publish." Dwyer notes.
"Many processes on Earth can only be understood if we study our planet as a whole or at least by studying large parts of it, which requires remote sensing using satellite-based instruments. For example, before 1980 the sea surface temperature was measured mainly from the beaches, ships and rigs, and therefore these data were scattered. Now, thanks to NASA's satellite observations, we have more accurate ocean temperature data, which are important for making ocean and climate models and weather forecasting. In the field of weather forecasting, there were times before the space age when humans had short or no warning of approaching hurricanes, now, thanks to observations from space, we can predict them and warn the residents many days in advance."
"Furthermore, when considering the importance of earth sciences, one should remember that there is no clear boundary between the earth and space, so it makes sense to study them together. For example, a very successful NASA program called "Living with a Star" recognizes the deep connection between astrophysics, the sun and humans. Such studies have been done at NASA since its inception."
"Finally, when Congress talked about earth science, the topic that was really the silent elephant in the room was climate research. I am not a climate scientist and therefore do not benefit directly from climate research budgets, however I do work on studies of the Earth's atmosphere (for example thunderstorms and lightning), and therefore I understand climate studies and appreciate their importance. A vast body of peer review in the field of climate science has demonstrated that the rapid warming of the past five decades has been largely caused by human activity. The expected future warming due to the constant increase in greenhouse gas levels will have a significant impact on future generations."
“To stave off the impending disaster we need to demand that our elected leaders continue to fund basic science research about our planet. A significant part of these studies can only be done by NASA. Should this be a high priority? There is no doubt. Will it inspire the next generation of scientists and engineers? Of course."
So far Prof. Dwyer's words. Am I the only one they remind of the parody science fiction book "The Fall of the Angels" by Michael Fallin? Especially the scene where the crowds cheer when they see the trail of fire in the sky left by the fall of the last weather satellite.
And a few words of mine - this is what happens when every sane person is faced with a candidate supported by the Koch brothers and wins over him thanks to the money. Even facts don't impress science deniers. An entire party went crazy and was anti-scientific and it's not that it conducts the so-called scientific debate in the academy, but uses its power to influence it, among other things by hiding evidence.
Do we make decisions on a scientific basis? The evidence is that in most cases no. Exactly this topic was written about last week Yomiran Nissan and Noam Levitan, the operators of the Facebook page "Big Science in Small" In an open letter to the incoming Minister of Science Danny Danon. Even the new Minister of Education noticed that something was wrong with science studies and said that The decrease in the number of students to 5 units in mathematics is a strategic threat. The report of the Central Bureau of Statistics recently stated that since the year 2000 Mathematics and science education is in a process of deterioration.
81 תגובות
Indeed the correct proportions are a science: 100%. religion 0%
This site is more religious about science
One should recognize his preferences about the person
drying rack. Not a vine. Gafni was in the previous term.
Also here, the chairman of the science committee of the Knesset is...
MK Israel Gafni from "Torah Judaism".
: )
For the avoidance of doubt, the previous post was entirely humorous in tone
Strong,
What a jerk you are. House Stark has never been in power, except for the northern part.
I know House Stark is spreading this rumor, so enough of this demagoguery!
Do you know the three episodes of South Park about A Song of Fire and Ice?
Winner Winner Winner Winner Winner….
I'm sorry WD, for the most part I respect your opinion but the reading "winter is coming"
It is demagoguery and designed to scare the masses by the pro-Northern media that has not internalized that House Stark is no longer in power.
Tuman the king!!
Heida Cersei!!
**** Spoilers for A Song of Fire and Ice *****
walkie,
The unfortunate decision by Martin (and his Ahithophel advisors) to split books 4 & 5 at the hero level (and geography) and put all the heroes that are important to the global plot only in the fifth book (Bran, Tyrone, Jon, Dinaris and Arya although she appeared a bit in the fourth) was my second editors the books. Even though book 4 got the less important heroes (in my opinion) it was better than book 5 by far.
In Book 5, how many descriptions of food, descriptions of sailing, descriptions of a feast can one tolerate?
And what about the ending of the fifth book (not about Dinaris but about another important character...)? It was super insulting. Just annoying.
Shmulik
for fun I'm totally with the books, but I don't agree with the fact that the last two books are boring (maybe only parts of them). The next really tedious thing is to wait years for the next book. The series is nothing more than a bad shadow, which recently turns into a mess full of illogical flaws.
walkie,
Of all the examples, did you specifically bring up "Shir of Fire and Ice"? Especially in the post series All Eitan is valid!
The TV series sucks, while the series is much better, despite the last two books being quite tedious
No doubt
The only things you show are that you don't read what is written to you, aren't really interested in what you claim to be interested in, and don't really want answers to the questions you ask.
You claim that you don't get any response to your questions, which is really ridiculous because anyway you can't read written answers because it's hard for you, but you say that you learn from watching movies, and my first response to you here was a link to a movie that answers most of your questions. Even more ridiculous is that you won't even bother to look at it because you know it would require you to acknowledge that you are presenting nonsense here.
You claim to be curious, but that is nothing more than a lie that everyone here has already witnessed. I hope for you that a day will come and you will really be curious, and delve deeper into your inquiries about the things that intrigue you, instead of being satisfied with the sayings and opinions of people who appear in movies.
Documentaries are a good way to be exposed to a subject initially, but they are a very poor way to learn things.
As a person who studied photography in the past, let me tell you that photography is an extremely manipulative tool that is very easy to lie with (and often that is what you choose to do as well). In movies the situation becomes even worse because you combine pictures and words. A picture may be worth a thousand words but all that means is that one picture can tell a lot more lies than a thousand words.
Do you like documentaries? So here you will learn a little about it -
http://films.nfb.ca/capturing-reality/#/79/
How do you expect to find a partner for your views when you have no basis for any of them? Do you really expect that you will write some opinion somewhere and someone will come and say - I think exactly the same, and it doesn't matter at all that our opinion is not based on anything, all that matters is that we share the same opinion?
How do you even want someone to share your opinion that you are not at all able to explain it in a detailed and coherent way? How is this partner supposed to think that you share the same opinion when in fact you are not able to express your opinion at all?
So far you haven't presented anything other than unrelated gibberish that doesn't connect to each other in any way
Your conspiracy claim is of course completely wrong. If you have ever talked to a religious person, you would find that he is absolutely sure that he is right and nothing (not evidence, not pointing out an obvious logical fallacy) will change his mind (a bit like you), which completely invalidates your claim that the parties are aware of the fact that they are wrong. And while the other side is more reserved about its positions, the perception is still that the approach is correct and in general, even if there are errors in certain points, there is no error in the path itself.
Again we find that you are wrong time and time again, but come on, ignore it and say that you are just showing food for thought and that you are not interested in convincing anyone. Surprising no one. There is no lack of cowards here who are unable to stand behind their words. They keep popping up and disappearing.
The questioner
In most cases, they try to answer him for the reason that Nisim gave. So that some innocent person does not come and read this nonsense and mistakenly think that there is a point in it. Unfortunately, this also applies in the event that the commenter in question is clearly a troll.
Personally, I also suffer from Captain Kirk syndrome. Some part of me refuses to accept the option of a hopeless situation.
Strong
So far.
WINTERISCOMING
No doubt
The only things you show are that you don't read what is written to you, aren't really interested in what you claim to be interested in, and don't really want answers to the questions you ask.
You claim that you don't get any response to your questions, which is really ridiculous because anyway you can't read written answers because it's hard for you, but you say that you learn from watching movies, and my first response to you here was a link to a movie that answers most of your questions. Even more ridiculous is that you won't even bother to look at it because you know it would require you to acknowledge that you are presenting nonsense here. (Another chance after all http://ancientaliensdebunked.com/)
You claim to be curious, but that is nothing more than a lie that everyone here has already witnessed. I hope for you that a day will come and you will really be curious, and delve deeper into your inquiries about the things that intrigue you, instead of being satisfied with the sayings and opinions of people who appear in movies.
Documentaries are a good way to be exposed to a subject initially, but they are a very poor way to learn things.
As a person who studied photography in the past, let me tell you that photography is an extremely manipulative tool that is very easy to lie with (and often that is what you choose to do as well). In movies the situation becomes even worse because you combine pictures and words. A picture may be worth a thousand words but all that means is that one picture can tell a lot more lies than a thousand words.
Do you like documentaries? So here you will learn a little about it -
http://films.nfb.ca/capturing-reality/#/79/
How do you expect to find a partner for your views when you have no basis for any of them? Do you really expect that you will write some opinion somewhere and someone will come and say - I think exactly the same, and it doesn't matter at all that our opinion is not based on anything, all that matters is that we share the same opinion?
How do you even want someone to share your opinion that you are not at all able to explain it in a detailed and coherent way? How is this partner supposed to think that you share the same opinion when in fact you are not able to express your opinion at all?
So far you haven't presented anything other than unrelated gibberish that doesn't connect to each other in any way
Your conspiracy claim is of course completely wrong. If you have ever talked to a religious person, you would find that he is absolutely sure that he is right and nothing (not evidence, not pointing out an obvious logical fallacy) will change his mind (a bit like you), which completely invalidates your claim that the parties are aware of the fact that they are wrong. And while the other side is more reserved about its positions, the perception is still that the approach is correct and in general, even if there are errors in certain points, there is no error in the path itself.
Again we find that you are wrong time and time again, but come on, ignore it and say that you are just showing food for thought and that you are not interested in convincing anyone. Surprising no one. There is no lack of cowards here who are unable to stand behind their words. They keep popping up and disappearing.
No doubt
I'm trying not to offend you despite your complete lack of understanding of scientific thinking (again, assuming you're real and not a troll masquerading as a fool) but do you realize how stupid what you write is?
"In retrospect, watching movies proves to be more effective than books" Would you agree to receive treatment from a doctor who learned medicine from watching movies? You buy a car based on a video of him driving in the open spaces? Can you imagine a movie that will teach you statistics or math?
This is the lazy thinking of a person who has given up the ability to think in advance and is trying to justify his laziness.
"in retrospect"?? How in retrospect? How is watching movies proven to be superior? (Apart from reinforcing your feeling that you are right and everyone else is wrong).
"I didn't find a serious Ratner for my opinions, and I had to check them and develop them myself..." What exactly did you develop? Share with us the thought process that led you to your strange ideas.
Throwing out a sentence like "aliens built stone walls in America" or "evolution is absurd" without a shred of substantiation are meaningless or valuable. You can equally claim "only unicorns can lead" or "winter is coming". Maybe you believe that a gut feeling and a strong strong will that your beliefs are true is equal to a well-founded argument and proof but that's only because you don't understand what a well-founded argument is and what is a proof.
Again, you have the right to believe what you want, but if you chose to tarnish a scientific website with your opinions, smarter and more honest people than you are obliged to address your errors and your mental laziness.
skeptical
I apologize for offending you. Now I understand why you look down on anyone who knows more than you.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OupqpR5eYrY
This is what a televised investigation looks like
Strong
Lack of reading due to a physical problem that existed in the past,
And it became a habit.
In retrospect, watching movies proves to be more effective than books (a picture is worth a thousand words).
In the "collusion" matter, both sides are aware of the fact that they are both wrong.
There will be no profit for either party if he or the other party "wins"...
You don't need to keep anything a secret, because it's a tacit "agreement"...
Therefore, you will not find actual conflicts between the two camps.
unfortunately,
I did not find a serious Ratner for my information, and I had to check them and develop them myself...
Look here too. No one agrees with me
(In this he admits that he has lived by mistake until now)
And I no longer expect a partner...
No doubt
How do you have "huge curiosity" if you don't bother to read?
Documentary films (even the serious ones) in which they do not try to prove, are merely a theatrical and colorful way to convey current information in an eye-catching way, scientific proofs are a more complex thing and there are no ratings for conveying it on a TV show. The main purpose of the programs is to combine entertainment with curiosity and the acquisition of general knowledge.
A successful documentary will give a child (or an adult) a sense of curiosity and a desire to know more. It seems that your intellectual "curiosity" ends.
If you really have "tremendous curiosity to discover the secrets of life here and its origin" you can do something beyond passively watching TV. Answers (if there are any) will not come like this.
You claim that "the religious establishment colluded with the "scientific" establishment to maintain the status quo."
Do you have a minimal understanding of what you are actually claiming?
Do you understand what it takes to keep a conspiracy a secret?
Are you aware that a single person who exposes the "conspiracy" will enter the pages of history?
Do you have even a shred of proof for the above conspiracy other than a very, very strong desire for it to be true?
You (and only you) call yourself a skeptic, has the thought crossed your mind once in a while, "Perhaps the scientific establishment, which consists of people who have invested many years in research, knows more than a single person whose source of information is television programs and comments on the Internet?"
It seems to me that the only question you are asking is "why do you hide from the public that everyone is wrong and I am right"
skeptical
Let me put a mirror in front of your face - be as angry as you want. And don't read - continue to get your poor education from cartoons.
You wrote "I watch a lot of documentaries, but don't read much." - This is exactly the problem!!! No scientist learns from youtube videos of charlatans and pathetic liars (like the Ancient Aliens people). If you want evidence of their lies then I'd be happy to give it to you.
You wrote "I have an enormous curiosity to discover the secrets of life here and its origin." - But according to you, you don't read anything, and it seems that you don't listen to what contradicts your opinions, so where is the curiosity?
You wrote "I was also brought up on the "theory of random evolution" - you don't understand that there is no such theory!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You wrote "The more I delve into doubt, the more and more I discover the absurdity of the theory..." - you didn't discover any absurdity, you saw lousy movies full of lies.
You wrote "There is a conspiracy between the religious establishment and the "scientific" establishment to maintain the status quo, since both camps know that when the truth will be revealed, both will lose..." - this is a wretched and brazen claim, without any foundation! She is also horribly stupid, and we would all love to have one piece of evidence of such a phenomenon.
You wrote "I would be happy to receive proofs that I am wrong..." - you received proofs, and you called me a liar.
Strong
As I have written many times,
No intention to convince anyone..
As I wrote,
I watch a lot of documentaries, but don't read much.
I have a huge curiosity to discover the secrets of life here and its origin.
I was secular and remained secular.
I was also educated on the "random evolution theory"
At some point, many years ago, I began to doubt this theory.
As I delve deeper into doubt, I discover more and more the absurdity of the theory...
As I already wrote here,
There is a conspiracy between the religious establishment and the "scientific" establishment to maintain the status quo,
Since both camps know that the truth will be revealed, both will lose...
I would love to be proven wrong...
No doubt
You're not really interested. If you were interested, you would do a minimal check, read an article or at the very least skim through Wikipedia.
You ask if there is a "scientific body" that examines even though you know that this "body" consists mostly of faculties in the field of science called archeology (I know you know this because you have used this word before).
All you do is ask a question, get a reasonable answer, shout "I don't get it" without explaining why you don't and then repeat yourself.
What's the point of asking questions if you're not willing to discuss the answers?
If you are real, and not a troll feigning scientific ignorance, then ask yourself what proof would provide you that the stones in South America could have been built by (many) humans over (many) time.
If we return to evolution (I suspect that the whole pointless discussion stems from your desire for evolution to be incorrect when the logic behind it is: aliens visited South America and built alien stone walls. Conclusion: man was designed) we ask the same question: what proof will you provide that natural and unintentional factors can (in the process long) to create living beings that change according to environmental selection and other factors.
And a final question: What would happen to you if you had absolute proof that life on Earth reached its present diversity by the forces of evolution and natural selection?
Strong
A few more words…
Are you talking about ignorance?
I often watch documentaries, about life in nature.
I am amazed every time,
How sane people accept the absurd theory
that life here was created only with the help of random mutations,
without directed intelligence.
In my opinion, only fools or blind people can accept this theory without testing...
Strong
What to have a discussion about?
I am interested to know how these walls were built with huge hewn stones.
I am interested to know if there is a "scientific" body that systematically checks
The transfer of technologies between the Old World and America, before the discovery of America...
And other puzzling, thought-provoking questions.
I have not received any response on these issues...
Eitan So why are you all trying so hard to answer him?
Maybe you are just bored and have nothing better to do?
But what doubt ni? What exactly are you showing?
I find it hard to believe that you actually believe or are interested in the questions you are throwing out.
I am quite convinced that you are simply a troll who weaves sand in the eyes of the commenters here and manages to drag smart people into a pointless discussion.
Your ignoring any comment except yours shows that you didn't really come to ask questions or have a discussion.
You are here for the same reason that makes toddlers who have learned a new curse repeat it over and over and enjoy the (negative) attention of the adults.
The important difference is that thanks to the wonderful responses of walking death, elbentzo, miracles and others, people who enter the site, get a lesson in the difference between scientific thinking and ignorance, between striving for understanding and trying to deceive, and between logic and panicked conspiratorial thinking.
Maybe that was your intention, to create a caricature of a believer without logic... If so, thank you for your persistence..
I repeat once more and say that I have no intention of convincing anyone...
I only show to those who really want to see...
I can't help those who don't want to see...
No doubt
You also don't read/address what is written to you. If you did, you would realize that it is irrelevant that you "don't want to convince anyone".
Good for you for being sure, but here too, you're wrong as usual. I definitely built a wall in my past (it was even a stone wall). Although I did not cut stones for a wall I built, I definitely had the opportunity to experiment with cutting stones (even with the help of other stones). You will probably be grateful to hear/find out that you can break stones with the help of other stones (although it's strange to me, because I think it's something every 7-year-old child knows).
Anyway, even if you were right, it wouldn't change a thing. My knowledge or ability to build something in a certain way is not related to the programming that builds it. I've never built a cabinet, but that doesn't mean it's impossible, or that it's rational to conclude that aliens help carpenters build cabinets.
walking dead
I am not interested in convincing anyone…
I bet you never built a wall,
And certainly not a wall of carved bricks.
elbentzo
Thank you (for understanding me)
No doubt
Are you just trying to provide food for thought? whom? Why don't you think about the food for thought you provide? Does it actually not interest you at all? Why share with other people things that do not interest you? What is the purpose of this?
You present a link that makes a claim and as far as you are concerned there you are done. You don't bother to research beyond that. As far as you are concerned, you can now repeat the same thing and nothing matters because as mentioned you are only providing food for thought?
In your opinion, this is the involvement of elements from space and there is no other possibility at all?
So why don't you ask yourself why these aliens, with their advanced technology, had to use stone hammers to build these structures?
"I repeat and claim that such involvement was numerous in the past, near and far, and it was from a large number of parties, some of whom were likely hostile to each other..."
Nice, and I claim I can crumble rocks weighing thousands of tons in an instant with nothing more than my fingertips. I don't have to base it on anything because I'm just providing food for thought.
Building in stone without a binding material is a common thing all over the world -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dry_stone
In your opinion, these walls were built long, long before the Incas, and mistakenly, their construction is attributed to the Incas? Wow, what a beauty. Which of the walls are you talking about? There are many walls in your films that answer what you said and many of them are not attributed to the Inca at all so this is a false claim.
Wait, you said there is a question that intrigues you? I'm shocked, really. You know what a normal person does when something intrigues them?
Until you answer this question, I can tell you what a curious person does not do (or at least some such things).
He doesn't ask what people who have looked into this issue have found/discovered, and intentionally leaves the question hanging in the air while making sure he doesn't accidentally check what people who have looked into the matter have really discovered about him.
He does not care not to read any piece of information that might give him an answer to the object of his curiosity.
He doesn't, doesn't do any experimenting or testing of ideas that are presented to him in any way.
He does not ignore people who direct him to places where he can learn about the thing that intrigues him.
He does not seek to think in the most crooked and illogical way he can, in order to preserve some esoteric idea that satisfies a mystical urge within him, while deliberately ignoring logical and evidence-based solutions that are presented to him.
He does not use his imagination and his brain in an attempt to understand by investigating the thing that intrigues him.
He does not ignore answers he receives because they do not match the expectations he had and the answers he hoped to receive.
skeptical
keep your mouth shut It's not nice how you talk...
Here is an excerpt from an article on Inca construction methods. In particular, it is said that they hardly ever used mortar (cement is something completely different), and if anything - their mortar was mud that hardened. Amazingly beautiful work, but only people... certain... imagine that space tourists build from sandstone...
Stone was the material of choice and was finely worked to produce a precise arrangement of interlocking blocks in the finest buildings. The stone was of three types: Yucay limestone, green Sacsahuaman diorite porphyry, and black andesite. Each block of stone could weigh many tons and they were quarried and shaped using nothing more than harder stones and bronze tools. Marks on the stone blocks indicate that they were mostly pounded into shape rather than cut. Blocks were moved using ropes, logs, poles, levers and ramps (tell-tale marks can still be seen on some blocks) and some stones still have nodes protruding from them or indentations which were used to help workers grip the stone. The fine cutting and setting of the blocks on site was so precise that mortar was not necessary. Finally, a finished surface was often provided using grinding stones and sand
For everyone except me
Here is an excerpt from an article on Inca construction methods. In particular, it is said that they hardly ever used mortar (cement is something completely different), and if anything - their mortar was mud that hardened. Amazingly beautiful work, but only people... certain... imagine that space tourists build from sandstone...
Stone was the material of choice and was finely worked to produce a precise arrangement of interlocking blocks in the finest buildings. The stone was of three types: Yucay limestone, green Sacsahuaman diorite porphyry, and black andesite. Each block of stone could weigh many tons and they were quarried and shaped using nothing more than harder stones and bronze tools. Marks on the stone blocks indicate that they were mostly pounded into shape rather than cut. Blocks were moved using ropes, logs, poles, levers and ramps (tell-tale marks can still be seen on some blocks) and some stones still have nodes protruding from them or indentations which were used to help workers grip the stone. The fine cutting and setting of the blocks on site was so precise that mortar was not necessary. Finally, a finished surface was often provided using grinding stones and sand
Miracles
Are you clogged?
How many times do I write to you that you don't deserve a response?
Why do you continue to humiliate yourself?
skeptical
Handwriting was invented in South America and Mesopotamia. how is it possible? Is there an explanation for this?
The wheel was never invented in America, and you claim that aliens set stones there.
Is there a "scientific" explanation for your findings?
My comment below was messed up
and appeared by mistake under the name "Kesher the"
Another food for thought,
It is clear that the stones in the walls shown,
which are "carved" in such a way that there is no space between the stones
were built without the use of a connecting material (cement, etc.).
In my opinion, these walls were built long, long before the Incas.
In error, their construction is attributed to the Inca.
The construction of the Inca was mostly done by adding rows
Above the above construction, and it was mostly a construction that added fusion material
between the stones
One of the questions that intrigues me, on this topic:
Were "scientific" tests done to find out if there was
A match between the material that was used by the Incas as cement,
And the cement used by the Romans (for example)?
If there is a match, how is this possible?
If there is no match, how did the Incas (for example) arrive at the discovery of this material?
More on the same topic::
There were many cultures in America, which had no direct connection between them.
Each culture built what it built.
In the period before the European invasion there.
What is the connection between the types of cement which cultures used them?
Overall:
Does the "scientific" community have bodies that deal with issues of this type?
skeptical
As long as you write nonsense and lies here, I will continue to point it out. I tried to treat you with respect, but you declared that I was "untrustworthy" - and like everything you've said so far - without any substantiation and without any logic.
We are the knights who say, "Ni"!
And in a word, click.
And in a little more words, there's an episode in Futurama where Bender complains that he's tired of working all the time. Then the camera (well, not exactly a camera, but you know) moves to the couch he usually sits on and you see the perfect shape of his ass buried in a pillow.
Miracles
You vile leech…
Haven't you realized yet that you don't deserve a response and I'm not going to respond to your insults?
I'm surprised there are still people here who even relate to you...
skeptical
As the only one who does identify here by name - a tireless chatterbox. There is not even a faint hint that aliens were in it, and this is one of the more retarded conspiracies.
Think (please try...) creatures that have the technology to fly light years in space - will launch sites be built from stones?
And consider that the AA group are a collection of known liars and charlatans. They really are "scientists" in quotation marks!
Human being - think about what you are saying!!!
I repeat and write,
I'm not trying to convince anyone...
I bring food for thought…
If you ask in my opinion,
It is about the involvement of elements from space...
There is no other option.
I repeat and claim,
that such involvement was numerous in the past, near and far,
And it was from a multitude of factors,
Which is likely because some of them were hostile to each other...
No doubt
Admittedly, it is indeed difficult for me to understand evasive and incoherent gibberish.
No. The first sentence indicates that you have not provided anything to support your view that there is any technical problem with fitting the stones in this way other than the fact that it is a lot of work. The second problem is that the way of doing the work you imagine (the part of moving the stones all the time to adjust them) is not necessary at all.
So before the problem was in matching the stones, and now the problem is that it is impossible to cut stones of this size? What exactly is the problem with quarries of stones of this size?
If you think it was impossible with the tools the locals had, how do you think these structures were built?
Good on you for claiming that it is impossible to cut stones of this size. This does not mean that this claim is not complete nonsense.
I can similarly argue that it is impossible to build the Eiffel Tower. There is no difference between the two claims.
I don't know what they are. You may be showing arrogance, but you are definitely not showing facts. You don't have a shred of evidence for the claims you make and you don't even bother trying to substantiate them. In fact you are aware that your arguments are so weak that you don't even try to deal with the questions I present to you.
You say - "Science is trying to eliminate" - but you have no evidence for this.
You say - "the moving of the stones in Stung or the construction of the pyramids, are not explained by science" - without any evidence and while completely ignoring the research that has been done in the field and of which you are not aware of its existence and you do not want to be aware of its existence, because it will immediately drop your claim and works against the Hajj your nada
You say - "that "smear" experiments that are not logical" - again without a reference. It's nothing more than the opinion of an ignorant person who doesn't know what he's talking about, doesn't know at all what research has been done in the field (and it really doesn't matter what field it is when it comes to the things you write down here), doesn't try and doesn't want to know, and isn't interested in trying to think on his own and try To understand how things that may intuitively seem strange or impossible to him can be solved in a logical way.
Are the stones too big to remove? Who is even trying to make them disappear? You are offered answers and all you are interested in is repeating your unfounded opinion, and ignoring the answers offered to you because they are not pleasant to you.
The reason you don't see fit to try to defend evidence that you bring to our attention here, is that you simply don't bring evidence, and that you are unable to defend this "evidence".
You are welcome to continue to supply everyone with Ni (you are not any kind of skeptic which leaves a doubt Ni), but don't expect anyone to take your words seriously when you show zero support or evidence for your claims and zero integrity.
As if really, to claim that people here write anonymously because they are ashamed to identify themselves, while you yourself are writing anonymously, and surely are more ashamed to identify yourself than anyone else here, considering the nonsense you spout here, there is no need to expand beyond that, it explains everything that is needed about you.
You don't even use your closing quote correctly. You're a really, really bad joke, and the only reason anyone bothers to respond to your words here is because it would be really, really sad if someone read them and mistakenly thought it wasn't a total hoax.
Finally, stop telling us what scientists claim, when you don't even know what scientists claim, because you never bothered to check what any scientist claims about any of the things you brought up for discussion here.
A general note to all writers here…
The scientific establishment is not ashamed to champion absurd theories
and also defends them, on behalf of famous scientists...
I expect that here too, especially since the writers are ashamed to identify themselves,
And they write anonymously,
Stupid excuses will be found to continue to defend what "scientists" defend....
I don't think it's appropriate to even try to defend what I'm bringing to your attention here...
"If they want they will eat, if they don't want they won't eat"...
Miracles
I already wrote that you don't deserve a response,
I'll add here that even on wretched slanders,
You don't deserve a response…
walking dead
Don't tell the skeptics, but the wiki entry on Stonehenge says:
Over the years, various authors have suggested that supernatural or anachronistic methods were used, usually asserting that the stones were impossible to move otherwise. However, conventional techniques, using Neolithic technology as basic as shear legs, have been demonstrably effective at moving and placing stones of a similar size.
Not that he will understand……
walking dead
I'm just showing the stupidity "that science" is trying to eliminate.
moving the stones in Stange or to build the pyramids,
are not explained by science.
There are "smearing" attempts that do not make sense.
again,
These stones are too big, to make them disappear...
They will eat if they want, they will not eat...
walking dead
I think you are difficult to understand...
Your first sentence I claim is "a lot of work"...
I claim that it is impossible to cut stones of this size...
Miracles,
you leech…
skeptical
When a fool despises me I take it as a compliment.
No doubt
so no? You don't have (or at least you don't mention) basically any problem with matching the big stones to the neighboring stones in this way except that it is a lot of work.
I actually saw the movie, I just didn't understand what point there you think is worth referring to. On the other hand, I'm pretty sure you didn't watch the link I gave you when you started with this nonsense.
Now I really don't want to see it, but only because it's crap I've already seen. These claims are a re-grinding of old claims from at least the sixties (if not before), they sustain an entire industry of pseudo-scientists who are nothing more than mystics on a dime. These companies don't even bother to change their claims after others have clearly pointed out where they are wrong/lying. What do they care, they know that there will always be another naive person (like you for example) who will listen to their nonsense and buy their book.
Specifically regarding this film it was very unclear what you want because the whole film is two friends who pretty much didn't say anything while walking around the ruins to the sounds of Andean flute music.
How do these extra movies help?
How do you listen to movies that say things like –
There is no evidence to support these claims, but until now there has been no alternative proof
Do you realize how flawed this is at all?
How do you know that it is necessary to move the stones from their place, many times, and check for compatibility in order to match them to neighboring stones in the wall? Because who in the movie said that? Because you can't imagine how it can be done? have you ever tried If I give you a simple way that can easily be done without it, will you consider it?
On what basis do you determine that this is not possible with stones of this size? (Also see previous questions again)
Have you tried to do that?
Here is an example of someone who tried a little - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCvx5gSnfW4
It remains to be hoped that following these steps the European Space Agency will speed up the field of Earth exploration and launch more satellites that will operate in the field such as CryoSat-2. In Europe the tycoons have less control over the EU's institutions because of its multinational nature.
Miracles
Are you hard of understanding?
You turn to me in the comments, a sign that you want a response from me.
Can't you still understand that I despise you?
walking dead
I don't want you to see, because you don't want to see…
Minimal intelligence is required, to see that for the purpose of chipping stones
to match them to neighboring stones in the wall,
It is necessary to move the stones from their place, many times,
and check compatibility. There is no jaw without repeated movement.
This is not possible with stones of this size...
I am attaching more links for the benefit of the skeptics...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzaL4NT0JKg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Akay8DTFnEg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5ucwGAYmUg
skeptical
And again... I don't want you to respond, you're the one who insists 🙂
I'm just directing the attention of intelligent readers to the nonsense you write. This is my role in the force. If you have something relevant to say, I'd love to hear it. Meanwhile you just write nonsense, and attack on a personal level
skeptical
What exactly do you want me to see in this movie?
What is the problem with matching the big stones to the neighboring stones in this way?
Is that a lot of work?
Miracles
Can't you understand that I don't relate to what you write?
You don't deserve comments, and I'm surprised that the writers are here
You are still treated…
skeptical
Did you bother to check what they say in the movies you bring?
You doubt everything, except the most absurd things - maybe change your nickname to "Naive"?
Don't you think it's unusual that no scientist is interested in these things? Everyone is stupid, but what TV show full of lies is the truth?
Enough already…..
Here is another link
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pGW0-wYo48E
You didn't understand the big stones thing.
The problem is not only the size of the stones,
The problem is in matching the large stones with the neighboring stones,
in such an amazing way,
that you can't even put paper between the stones...
There are lots of large stones that have been moved for various purposes and often also hewn into certain shapes in many, many places across large parts of the world. In many, many cases much older than the structures in the video that Skepni linked to. There is no rational reason to think that some imaginary fantasy of someone who didn't really bother to check the feasibility and construction date in any case is something that should be listened to. One of the funny things about the video is that some of the pictures in it are actually from other websites than the one mentioned in the video.
In today's situation, I can take some photos in my backyard, add some arrows and circles with photoshop, edit it into a video, add mysterious/dramatic music, and claim that there is something there that cannot be explained and that it requires that gods, aliens or ancient civilizations hiding from us exist or some Such nonsense, and there will be several hundred naïves who will buy this shit, and if I ask them they might even give me money for more information about it. It's just like people look for nonsense to believe in because the world doesn't seem interesting enough to them without it.
walking dead
And even more interesting is that the largest stones after Baal Bek are in Jerusalem. And we know exactly who placed them.
By the way, just so you know, if you want to deal with large carved stones, then the largest ones are actually in Baal Bek.
skeptical
Are you aware that your other amazing video is the same video in the link you gave the first time?
skeptical
Scientists do not ignore the findings. They ignore the explanations of a group of idiots who do not know what science is. I agree that not all are lovable, some are charlatans.
my father
Does the link I brought show "nonsense" for you?
There is something more tangible than these huge stones,
Who are clamoring for a plausible explanation?
Here is another amazing video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=goWllkLpY_s
It turns out that these structures were not made by the Incas, as "scientists" claim.
But they were much, much older than the Inca.
The Indian Inca tribes, just added several layers
in certain places.
You can easily distinguish the differences, according to the quality of the construction...
I'm not interested in checking nonsense. The pyramids were not built by aliens either. Apparently there were periods in antiquity when the technology was better and times when the technology was less good, therefore it was not preserved. The ancients were not stupid and used everything they could.
skeptical
oh really? I don't even have the energy to deal with your bullshit. I leave it to you –
http://ancientaliensdebunked.com/
How many readers know how much crap there is on YouTube? 35 hours of footage are uploaded to YouTube every second.
No man is able to see everything even if he lives for thousands of years.
my father
Who did that ?
How did they do it?
When did they do it?
What's amazing about it,
There are dozens of sites in different places in South America,
which have buildings in this style.
The walls cannot be carved, because it is impossible to carve with such precision and with such a hard material...
They are visible to all.
They have not been discovered now in the excavations...
Isn't this a shame and a word for "science" to hide
these findings? And that's what science does... ignores...
How many of the readers here knew beforehand about which photos?
It is doubtful if 10,000 years ago there were more than Inuit camps mainly in North America. These cultures operated much later than the cultures of the Old World, 2,500-3,00 years at the most.
I bring food for thought here...
The link here brings amazing photos of sensual finds for all to see in Latin America.
They are said to be over 10.000 years old.
Why do "scientists" ignore these findings?
How were these walls formed, which contain stones that, even today,
You can't move them, and you certainly can't grind them up and put them on the wall...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=goWllkLpY_s
No budgets to explore this wonder?
skeptical
What is the greenhouse gas for which you are most interested in reducing its emissions as part of the campaign to prevent global warming?
In what way does it pollute the air and how might it harm humans?
What is the relationship between its emissions and other greenhouse gases and how can these other gases harm humans?
Miracles,
To remind you, you don't deserve a response...
walking dead
The activity of the campaign to prevent global warming
Reduces "the pollution of the air you breathe...
Avi,
There is no doubt that there is a change in the climate, and there is a change in the rains that fall.
This does not prove that there is global warming….
skeptical
What exactly is positive about reducing greenhouse gas emissions if it has no effect on the climate?
"It is possible to collect data on temperatures in large parts of the earth, without the need for inflated budgets"
What do you define as inflated budgets? Who receives them and where do they go?
More than two-thirds of the area of Israel is covered by water, by what means do you intend to collect data on this area?
How exactly do you think this accuracy is obtained in the weather forecast?
Do you actually believe that there are actually no inflated budgets like you implied exist?
skeptical
Have you already invested your money in real estate in Miami Beach, or not?
skeptical
Are you claiming that the last year in the US was colder than usual?
In the winter it should snow, the warming did not cancel the winter but it changed its character. Compared to the snows in the east, there is a strong drought in the western US, and even here, the rains that used to be continuous have become unpredictable.
Where exactly do the forecasters pull the satellite image in which they show the depressions that are approaching?
Tal Inbar once said that he spoke to a taxi driver and said that he was researching, among other things, the field of space. The driver told him what do you need the space for? I manage, I have a GPS, I get where I need to go....
Faced with shouts about the "warming" of the earth,
I wonder how they suppress the continuous snows that were last winter in the USA.
I am happy about the public activity to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
It's definitely positive.
With today's technological means, it is possible to collect data on temperatures
in large parts of the earth, without the need for inflated budgets.
I admire the great accuracy in the weather forecasts,
which are given a week in advance, without the need for inflated budgets.
Shai, do you know another way besides "climate denial" that is able to deal with 48 degrees outside?! I do not.
What is a 'climate denier'?
Because it's too late. Even if they stop the trend, the recession and unemployment in the world will cause bloody wars.