The truth must be told:but are you ready to hear it

reply to post by EarthCitizen07



I like your post just one problem China has a large human rights issue, so they can enforce such a thing. Our Constitution will not allow such infringement or enacting of law that would do that. Either on a national level or a state one.

Nuclear batteries have been in use for a long time.

Some early pacemakers had batteries powered by PLUTONIUM!

Nuke ya lur battry

[edit on 12/4/09 by emsed1]

Here's a picture of one from the 70's manufactured by MedTronic for a pacemaker. Notice the Pu-238 symbol.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/654fad0a72d7.jpg[/atsimg]


[edit on 12/4/09 by emsed1]

Originally posted by drmeola
reply to post by EarthCitizen07

 

I like your post just one problem China has a large human rights issue, so they can enforce such a thing. Our Constitution will not allow such infringement or enacting of law that would do that. Either on a national level or a state one.

America does not have an over-population problem but even if it did I am sure new unconstitutional laws could be enacted to deal with anything.

Why stop with patriot act, homeland security, afghan&iraqi "war", cia spying on american citizens, healthcare taxation, carbon tax, forced vaccinations, etc?

reply to post by drmeola


With that logic, the real question should be "Are they ready to tell us?", not "Are you ready to hear it?".

When I consider the implications of "conspiracies" like what you have stated, it reveals to me the massive numbers of people throughout history and today who must have participated in suppressing knowledge and technology for whatever reasons. It's seems a very difficult task to accomplish if not impossible.

The only way that even comes close to being reasonable is if there is indeed one or more entities (human or not) who are at the very top ("the powers that be") who already know everything and control everything. If that is so, then for all intents and purposes, it or they are in fact "Kings" or "Gods".

And the rest of "us" are no more intelligent than other creatures. We just go about our lives doing what "seems" natural to us. Even though our actions are "inspired" through indoctrination and law.

reply to post by slimpickens93


Interesting thought about the charging companies that would be cool. But no I live on the east coast grew up in New Jersey and taught for New Jersey New York and Pennsylvania. And I currently live down in the southern states still on the east coast.

Food for thought my friend, but example of are we ready to hear it we can use the radio broadcast by Orson Wells and the war of the worlds. In the beginning of the broadcast some people thought it was a real news broadcast and how many people committed suicide in the first 15 minutes of the broadcast. Until they announced it is a show its not real.

Whether right or wrong I believe it set the precedence for keeping some projects as secrete as possible, until such time the people are ready mentally to handle it. Even today with all the movies, and interest in UFOs. What do you think would happen if it was announced on the 11 o’clock news?

Originally posted by Bluebelle

Originally posted by drmeola
reply to post by slimpickens93

 

The real problem is even if people saw with there own eye’s the truth, they wouldn’t believe it.

That said... I have my bag of popcorn ready, and Im ready to here the truth.

I think that what statements like that really mean is...

"The real problem is whenever I tell people about the crazy ideas (truth) in my mind, they don't believe it. Therefore "they" are not ready."

People are always "ready" to hear/see truth. It is those that know the truth who aren't willing to share it.

There may very well be a God or intelligent creatures from far away planets or any number of other "truths". But without evidence it will not be accepted as truth. And I mean "direct evidence", not "circumstantial evidence".

The burden of proof falls upon those who claim to present the "truth".

If anyone can present truth with proof, it will be accepted.

reply to post by drmeola


Some interesting ideas here, I have a question:

You infer that these (nuclear/satellite) batteries could feasibly replace our use of the internal combustion engine for automobiles, or alternative energy storage devices/cells under consideration (e.g. hydrogen). Would we have enough energy and materials to produce these batteries for the number of vehicles in use today? Please explain/indicate what materials are used, where we get those materials from (e.g. is it like the 'rare earth minerals that are used in satellites/motors for hybrid vehicles that are inconveniently all located in mines in China?), and how much energy/labour goes into making each unit?

Also, where are they on lifecycle/end-of-cycle costs/processes?

Number of cars in USA: "Overall, there were an estimated 254.4 million registered passenger vehicles in the United States according to a 2007 DOT study." Wikipedia link

Number of cars in the world: "A 1997 report claimed that in that year, over 600 million motor vehicles existed in the world. It went on to predict that if the existing trends continued, that number would double in the next 30 years. So in 2030, we could see 1.2 billion cars. And we thought parking was bad now." Ask Yahoo link

That's a lot of power units to make/dispose/recycle...

Ta!


[edit on 5-12-2009 by curioustype]

[edit on 5-12-2009 by curioustype]

[edit on 5-12-2009 by curioustype]

reply to post by drmeola


Yes. How many people did commit suicide that day? Additionally, how many people committed suicide the day before that?

Media outlets and historians are very good at spinning stories and facts to fit a preconceived conclusion.

Just like currently with global warming.... as if it hasn't happened before.

Most people did NOT commit suicide during the "War of the Worlds" broadcast.

However, thousands die everyday while simply following the instructions and rules given by their "masters".

reply to post by slimpickens93


I follow you, I wish there was some censes, or news paper obit for the whole week to better get a hold of the numbers. But bottom line inventors are being stronger armed by big business. Look at Tucker, he built a car so successful they squashed him, and out of the some 200 cars that were built over 80 percent of them are still running today. Or why is the big electric companies trying to ban information being published on how to make electricity at home. Found here: www.how2buildsolarpanels.com...
Because it hurts there bottom line.

reply to post by curioustype


To try and answerer some of your questions, the battery after the 100 thousand miles would be recharged not replaced. How is available of raw materials to make, like any thing else as much as public out cry would for such a product would be. Price who knows we sell electric cars now that they charge a fortune for, yet if you look around the world they have electric cars that cost under 5 thousand dollars for a 4 passenger. But no they will not allow that productive car here in America cause that would cut there bottom line. And couldn’t fairly compete. I was young and don’t understand the science of the device I just know that it worked and was placed on a shelf, for what ever reason they make up because it hurt someone else’s bottom line. Remember its all about big money. Not the people.

reply to post by drmeola


Any scientists out there able to advise on what goes into these nuclear batteries, and whether it would be realistic to produce such materials economically on the kind of scale required? Sounds a lot like the nuclear bomb programmes c. cold war arms race, but that proved soooo expensive, many countries are still reluctant to build new power plants (where the raw materials were produced/processed) part due to cost, part due to public acceptance/fear/safety concerns, and produced lots of nasty waste/spills - would this be more realistic now and if this spin-off use was factored in?

reply to post by drmeola


No doubt corporations/governments/religions attempt to suppress knowledge. But I believe that it's simply the nature of capitalism/politics/religion, rather than some eternal global conspiracy to keep humans from learning "the truth".

The difference is that in the former case, the actors are acting "individually". In the latter, the actors are acting in concert.

There's not really sufficient evidence to conclude either is true.

One must ask, what is the intent or motive? I conclude that in all scenarios, the primary motive is wealth, which is really only a means to gain control of others and reap the fruit of others' labor. One could imagine that we are all would be slave masters, if presented with opportunity.... "God's image" and all that.

One bad apple can spoil the whole bunch. And the "truth" is that we are only here for a little while. Consider wisely the amount of time you pursue the "truth". You cannot see the forest until you have walked out of the trees. But, how do you know if the trees ever end? How deep is the rabbit hole?

I don't know if I am ready to hear the truth, but I would love to know it.

But I could do without hearing "the truth" as presented constantly by others who don't know anymore than what they have read, heard, or imagined.

reply to post by slimpickens93


Hi slimpickens93 I think I like this post the best so far. Thank you.

Is life itself even true? Or, are we simple held into a joint or shared illusion of existence? I love the book series Emanuel, I recommend it to all, it’s worth a read with an open mind, and it ponders and try’s to answer some of these very questions.
There are as many point of views out their as there are people. I personally love them all and try and see how there logic works in accordance of the beliefs. After all it’s the heart of any good debater or lawyer to know both sides of every argument so you can better approach your own side of that debate.

reply to post by drmeola


It isn't just about fascinating "advanced" technology being suppressed. Knowledge doesn't even have to be suppressed in many instances. It only needs to be regulated. For example, look at the number of end uses of hemp, a plant which is easy to grow, easy to harvest. It can be used for making paper, rope, and many other things. Yet is is outlawed. I cannot grow my own tobacco (legally) without paying lots of taxes for licensing and such. I can't even sell more than four automobiles (legally) in one year's time without complying with a ridiculous amount of regulations which make it nearly impossible for the average person to do.

I can't even ride an electric bicycle down a "public" street, without paying taxes and purchasing licensing and insurance etc...

Soon it seems I won't even be able to breathe without being taxed for it.
We will be fined for the "crime" of living.

Is it a conspiracy? Yes and no. It depends on how you see it.

reply to post by drmeola


Can you elaborate on the Emmanuel series?

I would like to look into that. Thanks.

reply to post by slimpickens93


Sure will love to it titled emmanuel’s book numbered 1,2,3 they are paper back in all stores compiled by Pat Rodegast and Judith Stanton. The cost is around 10 u.s dollars.

I recommend skipping the intro put a paper clip on it, read a few chapters then go ahead and read the intro this includes if you can, not reading the back cover.

I hope you get as much enjoyment out of them as I have. I sure you will find it interesting.

This is not a religious book, and has no connection or relation to any religion.



[edit on 5-12-2009 by drmeola]

Perhaps a box with an isotope or Radium for power.
Electrical engineering might call it a current generator and not
a voltage generator. A load must always be supplied or a gas
buildup can explode the small black box.

A closely related, publicly available technological source of the “acceptable” variety, is in Physical Chemistry2. The author laid out the scientific facts, leaving it to the creative to figure out the use. One gram of radium (approx. 1/31 oz.), placed in a lead box with an aperture directed into an air tube, criss-crossed by a magnetic field and electric field plates, will create and separate abundant positive and negative charges from air, in sufficient quantity to replace the entire Four Corners Regional power complex, indefinitely. This revelation is only a juxtaposition of Tesla’s earlier discoveries of around 1904, and earlier patent of 1901. After Tesla discovered that J.P. Morgan had pretended to subsidize him in bad faith—even disguising his greed as philanthropy—in order to gain a controlling interest in all Tesla’s patents, Tesla’s only recourse was to withdraw his application on the patent. 2 PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY, E. A. Moelwyn-Hughes, Pergamon Press, Oxford, 1965. Page 224: Rutherford and Geiger found the number of alfa-particles ejected per second from 1 g of radium was 3.4 x 1010 (k=1.26 x 10-11 sec-1 , later determined by Madam Curie at 1.38 x 10-11 ). Each particle carries two units of positive electricity. This will produce 34 zillion alfa - particles per second, at 4.5 Mev. The number of charges per second, yields huge a amperage which, when stepped down to normal 120 VAC, is staggering. Page 230: 1 atom of radium expels one alfa-particle producing 1.5 billion ions, at 4.5 Mev. Page 231: “One alfa-particle has more than sufficient kinetic energy to bring about all the ionizations which stand to its credit”, and is “..quantitatively sound”.

reply to post by TeslaandLyne


Wow, now that’s what I call scientific proof. Hard to follow for a layman as myself. But from what I gathered not only is it true the little black box could more than hold and maintain enough power to run most anything. As it is “..quantitatively sound”.
Thank you for your post I’m sure for as many questions you might have just answered, a million more will now be asked of you. I hope you can continue to participate in our discussion.

reply to post by drmeola


Thanks for sharing your knowledge and your dad's great ability.
My dad once made a half sphere of metal and said it was a bulb.
Two years ago while seeing a Tesla patent for radient energy
there was the bulb as described a 'hemisphere' of aluminum.
Don't know how my dad's experiment went but we still use
power line electricity.

The problem with radioactive power sources is its banned
as a security risk.
One experimenter was caught carrying a sample on an airplane.
There are better ways and air can be ionized with ozone makers.
Not even going into ions there should be ways as outlined by
some that increase frequency for power which seem impossible.