Just because "most of what you know" did not come from the Internet does not mean that the Internet is not a good place to learn things and find truth and information.

In one thread you are talking about how the discovery of a new particle could change everything we know about physics and in this thread you suggest that you believe that the Philadelphia experiment was a simple experiment to try to make a ship invisible to radar and nothing else. Really?

Are people so bored with reality that they go around making this stuff up? Is that what you believe? All the stories and witnesses mean nothing because you believe the official story and because "the physics doesn't work."

..and then you say that the physics doesn't work "because you work with physics."

So you say I have no idea. No, I don't. I only have your word. I asked if you are claiming that you worked on secret government projects. Are you? I know people who worked at area 51. So what?

That was a place that the government lied and lied and lied about for years. (And there are other places that they are still lying about.) I know a person in my area that works directly with secret UFO stuff for the government. (And I know how people and governments lie.) I know about threats to home and life received by friends from unknown persons to stop printing certain things in their tiny little newspaper. I've seen mutilated cows, been followed by a private Investigator working for an unknown agency etc.

Hey I know stuff I did not learn on the Internet too. Big deal.

You seem to have gotten everything I wrote confused. I said the experiment was to make the ship invisible to magnetic mines, not light. There were no recorded problems with the radar. And much of the recorded history has been confused between two ships with somewhat similar names.

The "theory" of using the radar system to try to make the ship invisible is silly. First of all, it would be much easier and cheaper (not to mention secret) to build and test the equipment at lab scale away from the public. And it doesn't matter what is found out with the new particle, it won't change Maxwell's Laws of Electromagnetism.

Note, these are laws. They are not theories. They have been proven in every possible way and sending a strong electric field, pulsing or not, around a ship will not affect your ability to see it unless you get hit in the eye with a bolt of static electricity.

You seem to think there is some inconsistency with what I wrote when there is not.

You keep finding how science supports and agrees with you while not having a clue what the science is saying, or me either apparently.

I have an excellent idea of your science education and understanding. You have no idea of mine. I doubt if you have ever met anyone who has had my access to the US government.

And back to the new particle, I have stated several times that the Standard Theory of particle physics isn't working out, and hasn't been for quite a while. It is a dead end theory.

there has been a couple of theories to that, one is the heat theory, like when an island will seem to disappear due to the mirage effect due to heat "waves"(atmospheric distortions)... some scientists think that might have happened on that occasion... but you know as well as we do that the government will always use their "smoke and mirror" explanations rather than tell us what they are really doing...

Since I don't know anything about your access to the US government I wouldn't know if I did nor not. But I don't have a lot of trust or respect for politicians or high ranking military personal.

If you want to claim that the Philadelphia experiment was just an uneventful confusing mix-up between two ships okay. That's fine. I am only mildly curious as to the reason there is so many wild tales surrounding it. But there are still a lot of unanswered questions as usual in that-- and in a lot of other fuzzy secret projects the government gets involved in and lies about.

Its supposed to be OUR government. They aren't supposed to LIE. But they do. That is a fact.

The higher up you go as a politician or military person -- the more corruption you are going to find or the more corrupt you are. (So if I were you, I wouldn't brag too much about your government connections.)



I do? Where have I done that? You're right, I don't have a clue how to find how science supports and agrees with me, so I don't see where you think I tried that.

Besides, I don't know what you think I want science to agree with me about. I have not made any claims. I'm just asking questions.

Why do people make up these wild stories? Why does the government LIE LIE LIE about everything? How can anyone know what is really going on?

What reason do I have for trusting the government when they have been caught is so many lies?

I have good reason to believe the government lies. I can't figure out why these other people who wrote about the Philadelphia experiment would lie. Just to sell books? You can write porn books and sell a lot more books. LOL.

This guy is for real.

The first time machine. Not many believe that it will work but maybe he is on to something.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oRWwI61so5Q&NR=1&feature=fvwp

A Morgan le Fey experiment could have been conducted in response to the Bismark's optical chasing of the Hood, but the Hood's own radar was never fooled into thinking the Bismark was attacking.

The government may have covered up something but it was not an "invisibility cloak". If they actually covered up anything it would probably be the recorded degaussing of the ship to make it invisible to mines to hide that information from the Germans.

If, for example, in the degaussing process, a wire came loose and electrocuted several men, a goofy story could have been made up to hide the degaussing purpose from the news. If, in the confusion of which of the two ships was in port, one ship was reported to be in Philly and the same ship was mistakenly reported to be in New York minutes later, a "teleportation" story could be made.

However, no one would have performed the reported type of experiment in the reported way at the reported place. It would just be silly; somewhat like ... water bends light so I am going to wet myself to become invisible.

That is true. It is also a place to learn a bunch of crap.



People make up stuff all the time. Duh! If you heard ten people give different versions of how alien monsters grew out of some of your old toenail clippings, would that make it true to you? Or would you just shake you head and say, "That's stupid".

The physics of the story are that stupid.

The story in no way compares to the stupid stuff made up about the buildings falling at 9/11 but it does show what kind of crap people will believe who don't understand the science.

This would be an interesting subject.

Here is an interesting question.

He says that he would expect to start receiving messages from the time machine from the future as soon as the machine was built and operational and turned on. The messages would be from the future, and from him sending messages to the past from some point in the future.

The question is, at what point would this causal effect begin? He states that it could begin at the point the time machine was built and became operational.

So, assume the time machine was built and is operational. That alone would not cause messages from the future to begin showing up if, right after he built the machine something happened to him that prevented him from sending any messages at all; or if he simply decided not to send any messages. So no messages arrive from the future.

Lets say he has two time machines for this experiment.

Lets suppose nothing actually happened to him and he decided to send a message into the past on the second time machine one minute after the time machine was turned on and operational.

Since that message was just sent, how soon would it come back to him? Right away?

How long would he have to send messages into the past until he would be able to start receiving them from the future?

There are other questions but these are the ones I would ask first.

I suppose you believe that an airplane alone took down the tower with the precision of one of the finest demolition jobs I have ever witnessed.

Maybe in the future, demolition companies that take down skyscrapers should just forget the explosives placed in the exact right places and just get an airplane and remote control it to crash into the building. It would be so much easier don't you think?




Well with all your work and education and experience you somehow managed to miss the point entirely.

I don't disagree with that, so what's your point? Are you suggesting that I don't know how to sort the out the crap? Perhaps. But the way I do it is that I look at motive. I usually find it, and I'm pretty good at sorting out the crap.


So you claim. But then the whole of science has not figured out how this reality actually works or where it really came from -- so I guess you are entitled to your opinions just like anyone else.





Something weird happened. Of that I am fairly certain. The point I am making is that I have no logical reason whatever to believe the official story from a lying government.

I don't know what happened. I don't think you know what happened either. So I ask questions.

Your assurance that it was just a simple test, and nothing more and that you should know because you are so educated in physics, just does not serve to convince me that nothing weird happened.

There is no reason for you to go on and on about my ignorance of science and that I can't understand the physics of it. You expect me to submit to your authority and your education... and I don't even know you or anything about your education and experience.

I don't think you know what happened there, or what went wrong. The book I read about it in 1976 was extremely detailed and it named names, dates, times etc. I can't find that book anywhere, and I'm sorry I lost it, because I would like to investigate all of the details they had in that book. All I remember is that it was very detailed and convincing. If it was fiction, it was very very good fiction, but it did not call itself 'fiction.' It claimed to be a true story.

But then so does the Bible.

And as I said before, the book said nothing at all about time travel.
But it did talk about bodies that were embedded in physical matter of the ship and other strange effects of the experiment.

And I didn't get the book off the Internet.

I hear unborn people....

I suppose you believe that an airplane alone took down the tower with the precision of one of the finest demolition jobs I have ever witnessed.



Maybe in the future, demolition companies that take down skyscrapers should just forget the explosives placed in the exact right places and just get an airplane and remote control it to crash into the building. It would be so much easier don't you think?



Well, you have proven that you have never seen a demolition, don't understand how they work, don't understand anything more than what some conspiracy theory says, and believe you know more than the engineers who design the buildings like the ones that fell in 9/11.

If you are interested I posted all the math and physics on how the 9/11 buildings fell on other threads, but I understand that math and science mean nothing to you.

Please stick to the topic. You missed the hint at your cattle mutilation completely.

You are the one that changed the topic.

I have witnessed LOTS of demolitions. I lived in Las Vegas. They take down and put up tall buildings constantly. I have also watched a television special on a company that does demolitions and how they do them.

Since you said you worked closely with the government, that puts you on the list of people I don't trust or believe. So no, I'm not interested in your math or physics on how the 9/11 buildings were taken down by a single plane. I'm not saying I don't think its possible, but I find it hard to believe.

Like I said, maybe, if you are telling the truth, demolition companies will just fly planes into buildings to take them down. It seems like it would be much easier.