TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Philadelphia Experiment, 1943
Pages (3): « 1 2 [3]

quote:

Originally posted by Psy-T solgrabber? is that you?

Who? No, this is Magnetonium.

Forget it, I have to work later on and this is absolutely pointless. Even though the evidence , no matter how hard you will dispute it, is there. Ignorance is bliss. Religion was right about apocalypse. There's absolutely no way we can do anything about it at humanity's current pace of destruction.

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium Whats your point then? Is the point that the newspaper lied to us?

It is becoming quite obvious that you can't read. You see letters on the screen and comprehension doesn't occur, rather you see whatever your warped brain wants to see.

My point, as stated before, twice:

quote:

Originally posted by NebulousQ I still don't see how the headlines (or text) of some newspaper constitute a fact that says an alien craft crashed in Roswell.

And just for kicks, again:

quote:

Originally posted by NebulousQ All said was that ONE FREAKING NEWSPAPER PAGE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE UNQUESTIONABLE EVIDENCE that an alien craft crashed at Roswell.

And if you had a little reading comprehension and insight then you would see that saying this:

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium So then prove my Roswell claims wrong. With solid evidence. Facts, that is. I already showed mine

prompted my involvement in this joke of a thread, saying this:

quote:

Originally posted by NebulousQ What I hate about you conspiracy theorists is that you always throw around some wild claims and then say: "Well prove that it is not true!". YOU are going against the "status quo", railing against "common knowledge", and seemingly lacking "common sense"; the burden of proof is on you, not me. You need to "prove" what you say has even the slightest credibility before I even need to think about caring about it, let alone try to prove its lack of veracity.

ok, i'll budge.. write your thesis in an orderly fashion, and try to avoid using hearsay as evidence, and i'll try to comment on it.

what's going on in this thread?

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium Even though the evidence , no matter how hard you will dispute it, is there.

EVIDENCE? WHAT EVIDENCE?

OMG.

quote:

Originally posted by Marc Summers what's going on in this thread?

COR overflow.

Let me tell you some common sense. Not long ago, Darwin's ideas were thought to be horribly wrong. The world was flat. Inquisition was normal and widely accepted. People who said world was round were burned on stake. Sun spun around earth. Earth was in the centre of the world/universe. Sun was in the centre of the world.

Today's "common sense" will be looked at some time from now in the future like what we look at what happened 200-500 years ago (Galileo only lived in 1600s).

I've talked enough. Enjoy your ignorant world!

Indeed you have talked enough.

I really like how you have singled out one word in my post and responded to that instead of responding to the whole post and the "gist" of my posts.

Again you are proving the "fact" that you can't read and you only see what you want.

I really especially like the fact that you picked out a word that I had in " " for a reason.

Your reading comprehension = 0

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium Let me tell you some common sense. Not long ago, Darwin's ideas were thought to be horribly wrong. The world was flat. Inquisition was normal and widely accepted. People who said world was round were burned on stake. Sun spun around earth. Earth was in the centre of the world/universe. Sun was in the centre of the world. Today's "common sense" will be looked at some time from now in the future like what we look at what happened 200-500 years ago (Galileo only lived in 1600s). I've talked enough. Enjoy your ignorant world!

they challenged the status quo, hence the burden of proof was on them, now the relavant difference between you and them.. is that they actually supplied proof - not one or two news articles on a subject out of (probably) 100+ available ones which probably contradicted what those 2 articles say, nor quotes of renounced government officials.

quote:

Originally posted by Psy-T solgrabber? is that you?

Where the hell are all of these people coming from all the sudden? I'm really quite curious about this. Is it a government conspiracy to hire underlings that go around making fools of themselves preaching a possible cospiracy in a manner that makes people think it's all retarded wack job babble so we don't pay attention to it? I mean really cause you know the government could totally do it with all their invisiblity and time travel technology. You just know they have to be behind something. Maybe the Government even tells them to call the people that don't believe them government agents of misinformation so it makes them sound even more crazy. Maybe I'm just thinking into this too much and creating my own internet conspiracy theory out of supposed truths and my own opinion.

SolGrabber accused us all of being on the payroll, but I'm starting to wonder if it's the other way around!

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium I remember you were the one who said that government is absolutely honest and can be trusted, but I dont want to bring out the points from the other thread because its going to be the same mess.

Um, no I didn't say that to begin with, I merely said that you can't trust every single nutjob conspiracy theory internet site either. And you really didn't have any points in other threads that lasted long anyways, so no point in copying them here.

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium I love your ignorance. Actually, I can read the article. I have the book with the article on the back. Plus I searched for some of the words and got the whole story. I matched it to the script, its the same. As for authenticity of the article, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roswell_crash < LOL, yes, please please DENY Wikipedia

I'll deny wiki easily, any source inforamtion that can changed by anyone who can access that site, which is how wiki is set up , can not be used as factual information, period end of story.

As long as you me and joe blow can log onto wiki and make amendments to anything listed there, its not going to be considered a trustworthy factual site.

A ufo crashing at roswell is NOT FACT you nitwit, if it was fact then there wouldnt be a debt over what happened.

YES EVERYTHING printed in the paper is true

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium At one point a creature came through and everyone went into a panic. They shut the transmitter off. The creature ate people and equipment. They had to go back and shut down the unit in Philadelphia in order to shut off the unit in the future so they could stop this creature in 1983. This was on August 12,1983. The vortex locked on to the 12 August 1943 test and formed a loop.

Ironic that a computer game had s similar backstory.

It's name was called Doom.

quote:

Originally posted by Psy-T yay, time travel, and portable worm holes too! according to howstuffworks' hypothesis, person B travels to space at 50% the speed of light for a few hours, with a portable worm hole - no less! then he jumps in the wormhole, comes out on the other side at earth, and is able to look through the wormhole to the other side which is somehow still supposed to be in his spacecraft, despite the fact that he didn't take his spacecraft to space at all. now let's stretch the time travel further so that when he comes back to earth it's a century earlier , now most probably his presence there on earth negates the discovery and implementation of time travel, not to mention it most probably negates his own conception and therefore his existence... lol, i'm laughing too hard to actually continue

In theory if one were to travel at the speed of light he would need enough fuel to put him near light speed. Fuel adds mass. In order to move more mass you need more fuel. With that paradox add the fact that one would have to keep mass at or near equal to that of light. Hence no one can travel at or near light speed.

Then you have people that add the sci-fi angle and that makes things more complicated because people believe that Star Trek BS.

In other words I'm laughing with you not at you.

Re: Philadelphia Experiment, 1943

Since you missed the memo, I'll clue you in.

This is fiction, it was a hollywood movie. You lose.

quote:

Originally posted by ogvh5150 Ironic that a computer game had s similar backstory. It's name was called Doom. In theory if one were to travel at the speed of light he would need enough fuel to put him near light speed. Fuel adds mass. In order to move more mass you need more fuel. With that paradox add the fact that one would have to keep mass at or near equal to that of light. Hence no one can travel at or near light speed. Then you have people that add the sci-fi angle and that makes things more complicated because people believe that Star Trek BS. In other words I'm laughing with you not at you.

1. "light speed" is variable depending on the temperature of the continuum

2. it is possible to travel at the same speed as light if you were to become light.

Same difference.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.