Earthquakes are Proof of a Expanding Earth.

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye
You say, well my arm is a arm because it has DNA instructions. And I would say, very good. And that is what is meant by "Intelligent design". Why should our Heavenly "bodies" not be afforded the same? Galactic DNA.

complete DNA degradation occurs at above 190°C

Let's see now, refresh my memory, are stars hotter than or colder than 190°C? For that matter are newly formed planets hotter or colder than 190°C?

I'm entertained by your ability to make up complete and utter nonsense that has no connection to reality, but this is way past any serious debate with these kinds of fictitious claims such as Galactic DNA etc.

a reply to: All Seeing Eye

7) You where wrong about the hydraulics in the same way geologists might have been wrong about the borehole (citation isn't that good, to be honest because aquifers deep underground have been postulated for more than the last 10 years) so why should we trust anything you have to say about engineering?

You point to me and say I am wrong? I was not the one who postulated, assumed what lay under our feet, to be unarguable fact. Now, you want to pick and choose what scientists you want to believe, but yet the evidence is there. The bore hole is there. I do not make the claims, I only have presented the materials. The only thing I can be wrong about, is bringing the debate, to the light of day. If you feel the results of the bore hole are in error, it might be best to address those scientist, I'm but the messenger.

But why should you trust me? I have brought what the greatest minds the world has ever known to one table. I, do not presume to be as intelligent as they. I submit to their observations, and conclusions. I also submit to that Divine Doorstep. As to my personal observations, my thoughts, my theories, certainly I can be wrong about this or that, but when you have studied under the greatest minds ever known I would suspect, I'm not too far off from the mark.

I am not ensnared into any psychological "Monkey Trap". I am free to change my mind, and let go of certain trains of thought, as more information arrives. For some scientists, the name of the banana that hangs in the trap is, well, you get the idea. I hope.

a reply to: ArbitrageurClaim?

But, here is a observation.

There is a thread now that has 13 stars, and 21 flags, all on the first page, entitled:

Mysterious Art Bell guest vanishes over time - In search of the Hollow Earth / Shambala / Agartha

No one, at least on the first page, has demanded the theories be substantiated. Will you be visiting that thread as well?

a reply to: All Seeing Eye

Notice that thread is in the Skunk Works forum, where all and any ideas are entertained without being subjected to the demands of evidence.

Notice that your thread is in the Science & Technology forum, where it is expected that ideas are to be substantiated in order to be entertained.

a reply to: GetHyped

Ah, yes, the Skunkworks. The theories that smell so bad they have their own pit of putrefaction.

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye
No one, at least on the first page, has demanded the theories be substantiated. Will you be visiting that thread as well?

That's in the forum where this thread belongs, skunk works, where you can make up any kind of bullspit you want, like "Galactic DNA" and you don't have to provide evidence for your made up stuff. So you should ask the mods to move this thread to skunk works and then you can play by skunk works rules:

www.abovetopsecret.com...
"ATS Skunk Works: This forum is dedicated to the all-important highly speculative topics that may not be substantiated by many, if any facts and span the spectrum of topics discussed on ATS. Readers and users should be aware that extreme theories without corroboration are embraced in this forum. Discussion topics and follow-up responses in this forum will likely tend to lean in favor of conspiracies, scandals, and cover-ups. Members who would seek to refute such theories should be mindful of AboveTopSecret.com's tradition of focusing on conspiracy theory, cover-ups, and scandals. "

Anyway I see it's a boncho thread and I like boncho so I read the thread. It's about some bull made up not by boncho but by some guy who got a serious bonk on the head and when he regained consciousness he thought the Earth was hollow. At least he has the excuse of a bonk on the head.

I remember a few years ago reading about people trying to raise funding to visit the inner earth and wondered if there were enough nuts to really fund such ridiculous expeditions. The only thing I remember seeing about any success was a made up story from a website that's banned on ATS because it makes up completely fictional stories, beforeitsnews.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

That's in the forum where this thread belongs, skunk works, where you can make up any kind of bullspit you want, like "Galactic DNA"

But, I was invited to ponder the origins of the earth by ErosA433. So, is it you bait, then bite? Is that it?

Anyone ever notice that no one debates the subject matter? And when they do, they say it is "citation isn't that good".

So it all has to conform to your ideology? Right? Your "Institutionalized" view? Science must fall within what is taught, right?? No one in science is allowed to consider anything outside of the gates! And don't give me the "It must be", I have shown evidence your scientific assumptions, were wrong. And I have no doubt the bore hole team were nothing more than scientific professionals.

And, We have every right to look into the past and see what the train of thought was. History!

a reply to: All Seeing Eye

So to my list of questions you used a lot of text to say...

*i dont know, but no one knows, so lets just say anything we want... space DNA... science is wrong"

My point of why should we trust you, is in reference to an earlier post you made saying why should we trust geologists because they got one thing a bit wrong...

oh and your last post is quite ironic to point the finger and say that we are simply wrong because we are being logically consistent. Science just demands that the general picture of things makes logical sense and can be tested, and all of your responses to that have been just simly to say "Science is wrong" and put cotton wool in your ears...



So i have this theory that the Earth was made by space Beavers, it is actually a big poop and we are bacteria

originally posted by: ErosA433
a reply to: All Seeing Eye

So to my list of questions you used a lot of text to say...

*i dont know, but no one knows, so lets just say anything we want... space DNA... science is wrong"

My point of why should we trust you, is in reference to an earlier post you made saying why should we trust geologists because they got one thing a bit wrong...

oh and your last post is quite ironic to point the finger and say that we are simply wrong because we are being logically consistent. Science just demands that the general picture of things makes logical sense and can be tested, and all of your responses to that have been just simly to say "Science is wrong" and put cotton wool in your ears...



So i have this theory that the Earth was made by space Beavers, it is actually a big poop and we are bacteria

Brilliant! What about the beaver dam in the sky though?

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye
Science must fall within what is taught, right?? No one in science is allowed to consider anything outside of the gates!

Shows how little you know, as do most of your posts in this thread. That's actually the job of scientists, to figure out things beyond that which is taught.

The key is evidence. Plate tectonics was initially rejected as a model by science because the idea lacked sufficient supporting evidence. It was only accepted once supporting evidence was found. You're proposing things like space DNA which are not only contradicted by the temperature evidence I cited, it doesn't even make any sense because DNA is used by living organisms and stars and planets are not alive.

To put it another way, you are allowed to make hypotheses "outside the box", but then you're supposed to compare them against evidence to test them and reject them if they are contradicted by evidence, a step you are totally lacking and apparently not equipped to perform (like not being aware of DNA breaking down above 190C and why it works in living organisms but can't work as you propose).

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

Brilliant! What about the beaver dam in the sky though?

Now your the silly one. Its hidden behind the subducted black hole. Gosh, I thought everyone knew that............

I'm not going to quote Albert Einstein when it is said, it was asked of him "How it felt to be the worlds smartest man, and Einstein said, I don't know, you have to ask Tesla". I'm not going to use that because I can not find its source. So I wont mention it.


And now back to "Gravity".

I'm not particularly fond of the following video. It has some rather distasteful language in it. But it does discuss "Gravity" and another possible mechanism for it. So, it should be viewed for its possible data and information.



Another, rather lengthy video about Nikola Tesla can be viewed here



"Everything is the Light"



Sadly, much of Tesla's work was not accepted by the scientific community. He wasn't a member of the "Free and Accepted order of the Beaver poop hunters", or the Royal Society..

a reply to: Arbitrageur

You're proposing things like space DNA which are not only contradicted by the temperature evidence I cited, it doesn't even make any sense because DNA is used by living organisms and stars and planets are not alive.

I should have guessed it would be taken out of context. Are you some type of AI robot that doesn't understand the small differences in expressions? OBVIOUSLY, I was not speaking in terms of human DNA, but illustrating the similarities. That is why I said Galactic DNA.

OMG, you are a robot lol lol lol

A human being would have asked for clarification lol lol

a reply to: All Seeing Eye

We could ask for clarification on what you meant but.. i suspect what you meant would be something along the lines of...

There is an order to things, energies and objects spin and in a mystical configuration that science doesn't understand yet, but, you notice how science knows nothing and yet stars still form.


The point i was making about star formation which was brilliantly avoided with a page full of waffle, is one of Occams razor. The stellar formation models that we 'scientists' postulate is very very simple, and through simulation, it appears to work quite well, predicting much of what we see in the night sky. It might not be correct, but it is simple and is a fairly good basis until we can figure out exactly if it is correct.

Now, all tests on gravity would suggest that at a zero order, Newton's equations are good. So, matter attracts other matter via this effect we call gravity. Never has it been observed that matter repulses via a force that is consistent with gravity. Matter can repulse via electrostatic charge but that is a different force. NOW my point regarding this yet unobserved in the universe anywhere is that what comes first? the ball of repulsive white light, or the dirt?

Lets say its the ball of white light... It would cause planetary formation to fail, because it is pushing against everything gravitationally (anti-grav) so dirt and dust cannot form a planet. But lets say it is not anti-grav... but... as you say, a star... and it is radiation pressure (something i kind of guess you might not be aware of) well again this is bad news as the only observed objects to be as small as the Earth... ish... and emit radiation at high power, is a neutron star... if the Earth was a neutron star... the Sun could not have formed near it, not only that, but the neutron star would mean the Earth's external gravity would be 2-3 stellar masses... the moon would not exert any tidal forces on the Earth.

Lets say the dirt comes first. You form a planet and then it kind of hollows out forming a compact object at its centre. Again we have to look at what we know about quantum mechanics and extreme objects. I already said that to form a compact object such as a white dwarf or a neutron star you need a nonfusion burning mass that is about 2-3 solar masses... again... this is just not plausible... the solar system simply does not have 20 some solar masses of material hanging around... if it did, we would not be able to launch rockets from the Earth, nor would we be able to guide them through the solar system, the tidal stress and general gravitational environment would make the solarsystem completely unviable.

So You are suggesting that we need a highly compact material that produces a huge amount of energy to provide radiation pressure or anti-gravity that just kind of magically appears at the centre of all planets but not Stars...

We are not being annoying... we are simply trying to show you why mainstream science does not support your view, it doesn't just cross its arms and put its fingers in its ears and says 'na na na im not listening' it looks at your proposal, looks at all observational physics and makes a judgement call as to how reasonable it is... and... well it doesn't tick a single box im afraid.

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye
A human being would have asked for clarification lol lol

The ironic part of that reply is, you were asked for clarification and That was your clarification response. The fact you're making up such nonsense answered the request for clarification loud and clear: you don't have any clarification. We could ask over and over again in an endless cycle and get different nonsense each time, but why would we?

originally posted by: ErosA433
a reply to: All Seeing Eye

We could ask for clarification on what you meant but.. i suspect what you meant would be something along the lines of...

There is an order to things, energies and objects spin and in a mystical configuration that science doesn't understand yet, but, you notice how science knows nothing and yet stars still form.

My crystal ball makes a similar prediction.

Forgive me, I have seen some words that are affecting me. Ill be back at it, in a few.

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye
Forgive me, I have seen some words that are affecting me. Ill be back at it, in a few.

While you're at it, can you explain why you keep avoiding the link between the Mariana Trench and the Islands to the West? The volcanic islands?

a reply to: ErosA433

Please review this Physics experiment before I discuss, share thoughts about our internal (Possible) bearing.

Can you put a magnetic ball into a hollow magnetic sphere?

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye
Forgive me, I have seen some words that are affecting me. Ill be back at it, in a few.

While you're at it, can you explain why you keep avoiding the link between the Mariana Trench and the Islands to the West? The volcanic islands?

Since I can find no materials concerning the Said scars, I can only assume I may be treading into new and unexplored territory.

As I said, Scientifically, there are no theories, no data, that presently exist, and if there is, please share, before, I offer my explination.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye
Forgive me, I have seen some words that are affecting me. Ill be back at it, in a few.

While you're at it, can you explain why you keep avoiding the link between the Mariana Trench and the Islands to the West? The volcanic islands?

Not avoiding the subject, I have been quite busy reading, and some things I have read are, well, unsettling.

In order to understand that feature of the ocean floor you must have a understanding of the EE/HE theory. I'm not asking you to believe it, only understand the theories.

Yes, there are problems with both and many people have tried to explain those problems one way or another, and their is nothing wrong with one using their imaginations to help answer those issues.

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye
Forgive me, I have seen some words that are affecting me. Ill be back at it, in a few.

While you're at it, can you explain why you keep avoiding the link between the Mariana Trench and the Islands to the West? The volcanic islands?

Since I can find no materials concerning the Said scars, I can only assume I may be treading into new and unexplored territory.

As I said, Scientifically, there are no theories, no data, that presently exist, and if there is, please share, before, I offer my explination.

Nope. Stone dead wrong. Laughably wrong in fact. And I'm wondering where on earth you're looking, because I found this after about 30 seconds via Google. See the image? Subduction. The oceanic plate is being pulled downwards, the lighter volatiles are melting under the heat and pressure and moving upwards and voila! Volcanoes in the spot above!
You find volcanoes near trenches. Near subduction. There's a link.
Oh and it's 'explanation' not 'explination'.