From: William Treurniet <wtreurniet.nul> Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2012 13:06:30 -0400 Archived: Fri, 31 Aug 2012 10:59:40 -0400 Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories >From: Nick Pope <nick.nul> >To: post.nul >Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2012 01:50:16 +0200 (CEST) >Subject: Conspiracy Theories >Though ufology hardly gets a mention, this major new article on >conspiracy theories may be of interest to list members, as >theories concerning government cover-ups are inextricably linked >with ufology: >http://tinyurl.com/9hdgs6w >The article was first published in the summer 2012 issue of The >Skeptic Magazine (UK), but I've kept things even-handed and >stress the positive aspects of conspiracy theories, as well as >some negative ones. The feature is an overview of the genre, and >while there's brief mention of several individual conspiracy >theories, I focus on the wider issues raised. This article is ironic given Nick's own recent foray into propagating a conspiracy theory concerning an alien invasion during the recent olympic games. His motivation for doing so, stated after-the-fact, is irrelevant here, since most people were not aware of that at the time. So I don't see Nick as an unbiased critic of conspiracy theories. Nick accepts the role of science in debunking conspiracy theories such as in the spraying of chemtrails; i.e., spraying from 35,000 ft would have low accuracy and have negligible effects on the ground. But he neglects to mention that scientific principles can also show that the official explanation of controversial events are wrong. This is the case for the events of 911, for example. In that case, the Official Conspiracy Theory is demonstrably magical in that it does not explain the rapid disappearance of the buildings, the paucity of building material on the ground afterwards, and the fact, as shown in photos taken from high in the sky, that much of the building material blew away rather than falling to the ground in large chunks on or near the building site. When the mainstream media studiously ignore such issues, what rational person would look to them for unbiased reporting in general? Nick belittles as "extreme" the idea that some new technology, i.e., "some sort of anti-gravity weapon", may have been responsible for bringing down the buildings. The evidence that a generally unknown technology might have been used was documented by Dr. Judy Wood in her book, "Where did the towers go?". Her analysis was the only serious attempt at a comprehensive scientific analysis of what happened to the twin towers. To account for all the observed anomalies, she concludes that a relatively low-power weapon based on the Hutchison effect was involved in bringing down the buildings. This technology would have reduced the forces holding materials together and caused the building infrastructure to disintegrate. I discuss some evidence for a technology that can reduce molecular binding force in the following article: Circumstantial Evidence For A Technology That Disrupts Cohesion Of Matter http://www.treurniet.ca/physics/mbftech.htm I discuss further evidence in the following article that a covert science and technology is under development around the world: Is Covert Technology Used To Create Balls Of Light In The Sky? http://www.treurniet.ca/bigpic/orbtech.htm The testing of this technology was captured on video, and is manifested as white orbs that can move very rapidly in the sky as if controlled from the ground. These orbs are also used to create more complex 3D shapes in the sky. No one is talking about this technology, so it is relatively unknown. So what Nick considers an extreme idea for bringing down the twin towers could easily have been the leading edge of military R&D in a number of countries. The undercurrent in Nick's article is that people should just stop thinking. It is telling the conspiracy theory world, "There, there, don't worry, let daddy take care of it." Let our formal government inquiries tell you what happened. Nick should also have said, "Until the official explanations stop being selective with the facts, there will be conspiracy theories". William Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast At: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/ These contents above are copyright of the author and UFO UpDates - Toronto. They may not be reproduced without the express permission of both parties and are intended for educational use only.
[ Next Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp