|
|
#251
12-12-2010, 06:05 PM
|
||||
|
||||
HI J-Player : You posted -->Did a lower mammal or reptile ever offer you any discussion to specify the nature or boundaries of space?
************ Nope, just you. but since you are my friend --. As for space, I am of a strong tendency to favor the Holistic Universe theory in which it bends back upon itself, among other interesting things.. Don Jose de La Mancha "I exist to Live, not live to exist". 
|
|
#252
12-12-2010, 06:35 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Does this mean a 1 micro volt signal might be sentenced to traveling in a circle of sorts, kind of like a current flowing through a circular path in a supercooled conductor?  Or is there still a possibility that this signal may become too weak for your best method to detect at some distance? But wait... what if your bending theory is wrong, and the theory that space does not exist... that it is simply a part of an imaginary idea that people thought up when they began to inhabit the earth is the correct fact? Would this mean that the 1 micro volt signal cannot travel in space? Would it mean the 1 micro volt signal does not exist either? Also, you forgot to specify the properties of "normal" atmospheric conditions. I checked the weather channel... it seems "normal" changes every day, even every hour.  Best wishes, J_P
|
|
#253
12-12-2010, 06:39 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
HI: you posted--> Or is there still a possibility that this signal may become too weak for your best method to detect at some distance?
************ This is exactly what I have been taLking about. the ability to receive or detect an eXtremely weak sig. This is where our present level of abilities falls short. Don Jose de La Mancha "I exist to Live, not live to exist".
|
|
#254
12-12-2010, 06:50 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
In order to detect an extremely weak signal, this signal must first exist *(see above for possibility that the signal does not exist). Now, if you are detecting an extremely weak signal that does not exist, then where did this signal come from? Could it be your detecting apparatus is faulty? Could it be that ideamotor response is detecting non-existent signals? Could it be that the person making the detection decided to tell a lie to prove his point? Who knows? I suppose you can look at what kind of talk you receive from the person measuring, then decide on why he is detecting a signal that does not exist. On the other hand, maybe the signal does exist. The question then becomes: Can you show me how you detect this signal when I cause the signal to happen in the location I choose without your knowledge? Best wishes, J_P
|
|
#256
12-12-2010, 07:48 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Afternon J-Play : you posted --> In order to detect an extremely weak signal, this signal must first exist
**************** Obvious? Every activity of your brain produces a transmitable wave, we need look no further for our example. So, does telepathy exist? Don Jose de La Mancha "I exist to Live, not live to exist".
|
|
#257
12-12-2010, 08:02 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
If telepathy exists, then it could be theoretically be used to detect an impossibly weak signal from a distant location that already completed several revolutions of a universe which bends on itself. On the other hand, telepathy could theoretically also detect a signal that did not exist, or that fizzled out and stopped after travelling some finite distance. So does telepathy exist? According to many proofs seen on the internet, it definitely exsists. But then, according to many other proofs seen on the internet, it definitely does not exsist. This raises the question: What can we believe? Are we stuck in the perpetual condition of eternal torment "catch-22" style? I suppose the question of the existence of the universe is more basic than the question of the existence of telepathy. So I would say we must first determine if the universe actually exists before we can make presumptions about the existence of telepathy or proofs thereof. Best wishes, J_P
|
|
#258
12-12-2010, 08:11 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
You forgot something. ...Like the following lines that shows the actual context of my post: Quote:
Best wishes, J_P P.S. Hint: Forum-101, (the course)
|
|
#259
12-12-2010, 08:44 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
A simple experiment created by Dr. Paul Doppler in 1939 proves that objects produce a signal that can be measured. This experiment can be done by anyone who wants to know the truth. You can duck and dodge and try to change the subject but alas…the proof is still there. Post #172 will clearly prove to you that these signals are produced but first you have enough balls to do the experiment…Art
|
|
#260
12-12-2010, 08:51 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
HI J_player be bk shortly, guests.
Don Jose de La Mancha "I exist to Live, not live to exist":.
|
|
#261
12-12-2010, 08:53 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
That is an interesting story about the history of Doppler, and your claims of duck and dodge seem misplaced. But nothing in your post answers my question whether you can detect the signal when I cause the signal to happen in the location I choose without your knowledge. The question was: "So can you?" Hint: The answer is Yes or No. Best wishes, J_P P.S. Hint #2: Forum-101, (the course)
|
|
#262
12-12-2010, 11:59 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
To prove that objects emit energy or a signal is simple. Use a quart jar. Take some liquid rubber and dab it onto the center of the lid. Pull it away from the lid to create a thin string that looks like the strand of a spider web. This is the hardest part of the test. Attach a 1/2 inch Alum foil disk to the rubber strand. Screw the lid on the jar.
Place a protractor on the table with the 90 degree mark pointing to north. Set the jar on the protractor and alien the disk in a north south direction. Place a gold nugget beside the jar on the 0 degree mark of the protractor and wait for the disk to turn. Now try placing other objects by the jar one at a time. I found that a slice of onion gave off the strongest signal of anything that I tried. What turned the disk? I can only conclude that objects emit energy.....
|
|
#263
12-13-2010, 12:03 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
You may be thinking of an electromagnetic field?
__________________
HH Rudy, MXT, HeadHunter Wader Do or do not. There is no try. Yoda
|
|
#264
12-13-2010, 01:23 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
That is another interesting story about how you claim you can detect a signal of an onion slice placed next to a quart jar. But nothing in your post answers the question from my post that you quoted, where I asked whether you can detect the signal when I cause the signal to happen in the location I choose without your knowledge. My question was: "So can you?" Hint: The answer is Yes or No. Best wishes, J_P P.S. Hint #3: Forum-101, (the course)
|
|
#266
12-13-2010, 03:38 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Best wishes, J_P
|
|
#267
12-14-2010, 12:35 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Thank you J Player…Carl offered me $25,000 if my rods would cross when I stepped on a coin. I made a movie of the rods closing when I stepped on a coin…Still waiting on my money
http://www.youtube.com/user/aarthrj3811...100 0163.mov
|
|
#268
12-14-2010, 03:15 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
But have you considered you again took Carl's offer out of context and omitted the conditions he specified under which he would pay you prize money? In fact, you are misrepresenting what Carl offered. It is the same as telling a lie in the Geotech forum. Carl never said he would pay you any money at all if you produced a film showing your rods cross when you step on a coin. He offered to pay the prize money if you could pass his test as follows: "Take 10 small pieces of plywood, say 4"x4", numbered 1-10. Carl-NC will attach a silver dollar under one of them, chosen randomly. You step on each piece of plywood and determine which one has the silver dollar. Repeat several times. Carl-NC will pay you $25,000 if you are successful". See here: http://www.geotech1.com/forums/showt...425#post119425 What you posted was a lie. You have no reason to wait for prize money because you never took Carl's test. You never found coins that Carl hid under pieces of plywood, so you have no prize money coming. Based on reports of your previous photo editing shenanigans, I would not expect Carl or anyone else to believe your video wasn't a fake, or to believe that you could successfully locate which piece of plywood Carl hides a coin under several times. Of course, you could end all the debates by simply taking Carl's test and proving him wrong, and also proving wrong the millions of readers who think you are an idiot who is all fake talk, fake photos and fake videos, but no action.  But we see you have historically never done this. You have carefully avoided any possibility of double blind testing, and substituted photos and videos that you make. Ummm... can we see the out-takes from your video that you left on the cutting room floor?  As Carl-NC said: "I expect a complete rejection, along with alibis, because you cain't do it. And I'm sure Hung will say this is an impossible test". And we see you did not take his test, but submitted a video in lieu of taking an actual test for which you expect him to pay you.  Do you really think any engineer at Geotech is as stupid as you are? Would you pay $25,000 for a video of an amazing performance? Isn't this kind of like paying $25,000 for a video of a dream vacation instead of paying the $25,000 for an actual dream vacation? Just as an idea, why not go back to Tnet, and stop posting your lies in Geotech. The people at Tnet are much more tolerant of liars than us folks. Best wishes, J_P P.S. New hint: Get therapy to learn to stop taking things out of context. Learn to tell the truth. Learn to see things for what they are, not what you wish to craft them into. There are therapists who can do wonders. You could become a better person.
|
|
#269
12-14-2010, 07:01 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
How the L-club works
It goes beyond "more tolerant", J_Player. On Tnet I often encourage them to lie so everyone can see what liars they are. That way, people who are trying to figure out what they want have a clearer choice between the truth and the lie, and those who prefer the lie know right where to go.
And since liars hang out with liars (some of y'all may remember the L-club on the old Tnet LRL forum?) they all have a good time getting what they want. Since they are actually getting what they want out of the deal, proving they're liars changes nothing, they already knew that and were happy with it. That's human nature. You've probably noticed a difference between dowsers and LRL'ers. There's a reason for that. You don't have to be a liar to be a dowser (although of course some are liars and many are just confused). A lot of dowsers are folk who would not cheat you out of a dime. LRL's are a different ballgame. LRL'ing begins with the proposition that you have to lie about dowsing. And then you have to maintain that pseudoscience fairy tales are just as true as anything that reason has produced-- even truer! Well, how can you argue with something as stupid as that? Reason won't help, reason has already been rejected as a matter of basic principle. It's rare to find an LRL proponent who is just honestly confused. The mental process that led them to LRL'ing required first lying to oneself and then lying to everyone else. And that's how you can get to a fellow claiming on a publicly visible forum that Carl owes him $25K because his rods crossed when he stepped on a coin. Heck, I can cross my fingers when I step on a coin, I don't even need coathangers. I can cross my eyes when I step on a coin. Nobody's impressed! Carl doesn't even owe me a dime! I guess the next step is for Artie to demand Randi's $1 million for a movie showing he can touch his nose when he's drunk. Blindfolded! --Dave J.
|
|
#270
12-14-2010, 11:57 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Maybe this is why I don't bother to read the TNet LRL forum. It is full of lies and whining about who's lying and who's not, but little or no real information worth reading. It is kind of like reading pages full of a bunch of nothing. I think Carl said it best: "I dearly wish you would waste your time on TNet rather than here. Unlike some of the other LRL advocates, you bring absolutely nothing to the party". I suppose if a person loves lies, the TNet LRL forum could be fascinating reading with stars such as Art. Best wishes, J_P
|
|
#271
12-14-2010, 01:27 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
J-player What do you think of gravity communications?
http://gravity-control.blogspot.com/...ons-means.html Just a thought
__________________
Bringing metal detectors into the world of imaging! 
|
|
#272
12-14-2010, 01:53 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
 Best wishes, J_P
|
|
#273
12-14-2010, 02:03 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Your answer lies here, in Dr. Berman's post: WELL, YOU ARE FINALLY WAKING-UP ( YOUR HUNDRED YEARS SLEEP..TESLA ), GATES' AND ALLEN OF MICROSCOFT OWN SETI ( SETI@HOME, THE PHENIOX PROJECT...AND HAS FILED FOR PATENT BASED ON RT COMMUNICATION, BASED OWN OUR RESEARCH AND DR. GREG HODOWANEC ( A FRIEND AND COLLEGUE FOR 10 YEARS ) WHO IS THE FATHER OF MODERN RHYSMONIC COSMOLOGY, THE ONLY MAJOR EXPERT IN TESLAN REAL-TIME ( PHASE CONJUGATE ) COMMUNICATION BASED ON TESLA ANALOG LONGITUNIAL BI-WAVE THEORY.... ...and here, answering this question by Joey: If gravity travels at the speed of light, how do black holes have gravity, since their escape velocities are faster than the speed of light? If you know what gravity really is, you will answer the above easily. However this does not seem to be your forum pal's case tough. If he does not know to date how a LRL works, he will do much, much less about gravity itself. Best regards and success for the Arc Geo Logger.
__________________
"Should exist injustice and untruths towards working LRLs, I'll show up to debunker the big mouths"
|
|
#274
12-14-2010, 03:52 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Morming J-Player mi buddy: Bk. You posted my question -->how far a 1 micro volt signal can travel,
********* Now 'that' is a very important question, especially if we are discusing theory of LrL's possibly working. It would be possibly the key to LrL recepton, since today we are extremely limited on reception, on both distance and sensitiveness through the conventional cummunication spectrum and reproductive devices. The trained human mind is potentially one of the most sensitive receivers in the universe in certain phases. However we are now starting to investigate other biological forms as receptors. Sinple sprouting beans will indicate local harmful, and accumulated radiation, far more accurately than any mechanical or chemical indicators so far. Especially when it is conidered what a broad range that radiation covers. It is extremely important to remember, or to visualize, the infitesimally minute energies that we are discusing, which may be useful for successful LrL opertion. Don Jose de La Mancha .
|
|
#275
12-14-2010, 05:05 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Or you mean that receiver was during evolution someway tunned to gold signals? Why do evolution need for human to be skilled such way?
__________________
Global capital is ruining your life? You have right to self-defence!
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
