EU DEBATES, instead of a Conference

[tholden]

Lloyd,

Two or three things to consider....

First off, a conspiracy theory is usually the most complicated rationale for anything and Occam's principle seems to say that a conspiracy theory should be the last resort after every other possible theory has been ruled out. In the case of environmentalists, I don't particularly care what their motives might be, all I really care about is defeating their plan to return the world to the dark ages.

Towards that end, the EU and neo-catastrophism generally bring two things to the table. One is a plausible explanation as to why stars might heat uup and cool off periodically; the idea of stars being thermonuclear engines offers no such understanding. The other is the fact that in past ages at least our planet has withstood changes vastly beyond anything mankind might be imposing on it and in that light it appears likely that there is simply nothing man could do to affect planetary weather.

A second point to keep in mind would be Dale Carnegie's observation that the rarest thing in the universe is somebody who actually views himself as any sort of a villain. People like Chengis Khan, Hitler, StalinAl Capone, William Ruckelshaus, or Rachel Carson invariably believe they are doing some monumental service to the world.

Third would be that there couldn't plausibly be more than a handful of Rhodes Scholars, much less anybody else, who could tell you any more about Cecil Rhodes than that he lived in Rhodesia and that there are likely as many rationales for participating in these causes as there are participants.

As far as weaponry goes I don't know of any military uses for anything arising or dependent directly upon the EU. Military applications of EVP which gets into the same area Julian Jaynes was interested in are a different story.

As far as space exploration, there is in fact a gigantic area of interest which the Saturn thesis actually makes sense of and which nothing else does, more of which later.

[Lloyd]

- I'm a little frustrated, folks. I haven't enticed anyone as yet, besides myself, to post anything at my science debates forum. I'm getting desperate. I don't know why it's so hard for anyone to go there [http://linc.lefora.com/forum/category/debates/page1] and post something, but I still have zero replies. So, now, I've started a few more topics, like the big bang, global warming, old earth etc and have started begging people at Craigslist to go there and debate me. I beg anyone here to go there too. What will it hurt? Is there a boogey man there or something?

[tholden]

Lloyd,

I'll get to the dinosaur thing this week.

Meanwhile, you'd asked about the EU and neo-catastrophism as it might relate to space exploration...

I've posted a few of the more recent Martian images here:

http://thunderbolts.info/wp/forum/phpBB3/v ... f=10&t=846

Those images are unambiguous; I view the idea of Mars having once been inhabited as a fact and not a theory. Again, NASA and the JPL are about evenly divided on the subject: About half of them are willing to believe their eyes as I am and the other half are in denial. The problem is that standard theories offer no way to picture Mars ever having been inhabited and you can't build megalithic structures with space-suits on.

NASA could go on claiming these things were natural formations and/or tricks of light and shadow as long as they had a monopoly on space travel, i.e. nobody else could plausibly go there, take pictures with their cell-phone cameras, and prove to the world that NASA was a government-funded clown act. Nonetheless those days are ending rapidly. We already have images of the Cydonia region from the European space agency:

http://www.esa.int/esaMI/Mars_Express/S ... URE_0.html

and it's only a matter of time. NASA at this point knows it's in a race to get there, and that they're going to make themselves look like idiots when they do. In other words, their ****s are in a wringer.

Now, in theory at least, the good people of Kronia, Talbott, Cardona, Cochrane et. al. along with Al DeGrazia could resolve this problem for NASA very neatly and simply: you're basically talking about a new vision of a history for our solar system which places Mars in a system-wide atmosphere at one time and which also points out the possibility of an atmosphere being held together by electrostatic forces rather than gravity. There would definitely be fame in it; there might even be money in it, who knows?

Unfortunately, up to now at least, some of the people involved in the EU and Saturn-theory movement have held the same sort of view towards this evidence of former Martian habitation which NASA does. For different reasons albeit, but the same basic view.



de Nile.....

[Lloyd]

- Sorry, I didn't realize anyone had posted here again.
- I had heard about a decade ago Ted's theory about Mars having been inhabited in the Saturn Age by humans. I also saw Hoagland's images from Mars by then. And I thought the theory was plausible and I still think so, but I'm not yet a believer. Velikovsky wrote an article once about the Nephilim, which the Bible said were giants or angels who came from heaven. He thought they may have come from one of the other planetoids.

[Lloyd]

He's debating others at this link: http://solarcycle24.forumco.com/topic~TOPIC_ID~353.asp