BNW Brave New World
Samenzwering, verborgen agenda's en geheime geschiedenis. De zoektocht naar de wereld die achter de façade van alledag ligt.
But anyway....about the online-video lecture....
Within the first minute,Matthew Bunn even begins his 'lecture' (most likely reiterating all the fearmongering baloney we have been told about 'atomic' bombs for almost 80 years) with a book recommendation stating that the Los Alamos Primer was an amazing document and mostly right.
Here is some (condensed) information.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Alamos_Primer
Spooky.imo.
[ Bericht 0% gewijzigd door Tingo op 12-07-2019 00:11:16 ]
Within the first minute,Matthew Bunn even begins his 'lecture' (most likely reiterating all the fearmongering baloney we have been told about 'atomic' bombs for almost 80 years) with a book recommendation stating that the Los Alamos Primer was an amazing document and mostly right.
Here is some (condensed) information.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Alamos_Primer
A fundamentally historical document rather than a scientifically obsolete document. The scientists and handlers (for whatever reasons) carry on with some clever sounding 'geewhizgollygosh' nonsense which they knew the masses (in 1943) would not dare to question.The horror! The fear!quote:'They also explored designs involving spheroids, a primitive form of "implosion" (suggested by Richard C. Tolman),'
'The Primer became designated as the first official Los Alamos technical report (LA-1), and though its information about the physics of fission and weapon design was soon rendered obsolete, it is still considered a fundamental historical document in the history of nuclear weapons.'
Scientistic fictions and theories! Whatever next!quote:'In 1992, an edited version of the Primer with many annotations and explanations by Serber was published with an introduction by Richard Rhodes.'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Rhodes
'Rhodes came to national prominence with his 1986 book, The Making of the Atomic Bomb, a narrative of the history of the people and events during World War II from the discoveries leading to the science of nuclear fission in the 1930s, through the Manhattan Project and the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Among its many honors, the 900-page book won the Pulitzer Prize for General Non-Fiction,[2] the National Book Award for Nonfiction,[3] and a National Book Critics Circle Award,'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_C._Tolman
'In a 1916 experiment with Thomas Dale Stewart, Tolman demonstrated that electricity consists of electrons flowing through a metallic conductor. A by-product of this experiment was a measured value of the mass of the electron.[3] Overall, however, he was primarily known as a theorist.'
Follow the script.quote:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Serber
'So it fell to Serber to give a series of lectures explaining the basic principles and goals of the project. These lectures were printed and supplied to all incoming scientific staff, and became known as The Los Alamos Primer, LA-1. It was declassified in 1965.'
Spooky.imo.
[ Bericht 0% gewijzigd door Tingo op 12-07-2019 00:11:16 ]
In the new 'reality' we will be living in,nothing will be real and everything will be true-David A.McGowan
Why do some people not credit the origin of the quotes they use under their posts?- Tingo
Why do some people not credit the origin of the quotes they use under their posts?- Tingo
Over de primer zegt hij toch echt duidelijk dat het oa over de physics gaat zoals die in 1943 begrepen werden, dus welk punt denk je hier precies te hebben? Scientificly obsolete is niet hetzelfde als fout, enkel achterhaald!quote:Op vrijdag 12 juli 2019 00:02 schreef Tingo het volgende:
But anyway....about the online-video lecture....
Within the first minute,Matthew Bunn even begins his 'lecture' (most likely reiterating all the fearmongering baloney we have been told about 'atomic' bombs for almost 80 years) with a book recommendation stating that the Los Alamos Primer was an amazing document and mostly right.
Here is some (condensed) information.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Alamos_Primer
[..]
A fundamentally historical document rather than a scientifically obsolete document. The scientists and handlers (for whatever reasons) carry on with some clever sounding 'geewhizgollygosh' nonsense which they knew the masses (in 1943) would not dare to question.The horror! The fear!
En dit is nou waarom mensen overtuigt raken dat je geen interesse hebt in een discussie... Wetenschappelijke theorie is nou juist ontzettend belangrijk als je dit soort concepten wil begrijpen. Dus nee, niet whatever next!quote:Scientistic fictions and theories! Whatever next!
Egregious professor of Cruel and Unusual Geography
Onikaan ni ov dovah
Onikaan ni ov dovah
En dan nog even dit:
Hoezo is het "baloney", wat maakt jou dan de autoriteit om het baloney te noemen? Ik heb je hier nog geen enkel wetenschappelijk feit zien weerleggen. Ik zou graag een voorbeeld van dergelijke onzin zien, en misschien kun je dan uitleggen hoe het wél zit.quote:
But anyway....about the online-video lecture....
Within the first minute,Matthew Bunn even begins his 'lecture' (most likely reiterating all the fearmongering baloney we have been told about 'atomic' bombs for almost 80 years) with a book recommendation stating that the Los Alamos Primer was an amazing document and mostly right.
Maybe the nukist canp could post a straightforward (specific where necessary) list of the reasons why they believe the atomic bomb story. A list that the non-scientfiically-minded amongst us might understand. Have a collective think about it. I'd be glad to read it. Take your time.
Fyn weekend allemaal.
Fyn weekend allemaal.
In the new 'reality' we will be living in,nothing will be real and everything will be true-David A.McGowan
Why do some people not credit the origin of the quotes they use under their posts?- Tingo
Why do some people not credit the origin of the quotes they use under their posts?- Tingo
Wetenschappelijk theorie is en bliijft maar theorie. Praktijk veel belangrijker is.quote:
[..]
Over de primer zegt hij toch echt duidelijk dat het oa over de physics gaat zoals die in 1943 begrepen werden, dus welk punt denk je hier precies te hebben? Scientificly obsolete is niet hetzelfde als fout, enkel achterhaald!
[..]
En dit is nou waarom mensen overtuigt raken dat je geen interesse hebt in een discussie... Wetenschappelijke theorie is nou juist ontzettend belangrijk als je dit soort concepten wil begrijpen. Dus nee, niet whatever next!
'als je dit soort concepten wil begrijpen'. hahaha. Never mind.
In the new 'reality' we will be living in,nothing will be real and everything will be true-David A.McGowan
Why do some people not credit the origin of the quotes they use under their posts?- Tingo
Why do some people not credit the origin of the quotes they use under their posts?- Tingo
Genoeg wetenschappelijke theorien die aan de grondslag liggen van de werking van een moderne computer... Ga je daar dan ook aan twijfelen? Alle computers zijn een hoax, want het is maar een theorie!quote:
[..]
Wetenschappelijk theorie is en bliijft maar theorie. Praktijk veel belangrijker is.
'als je dit soort concepten wil begrijpen'. hahaha. Never mind.
Egregious professor of Cruel and Unusual Geography
Onikaan ni ov dovah
Onikaan ni ov dovah
Ja ok, maar niet alle theorieen ooit in de praktijk gebruikt worden.quote:
Vrijwel alles wat in de praktijk wordt gebracht begint met een theorie die je uitwerkt.
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/theorist
'someone who develops ideas about the explanation for events'
Sommige theorieen blijven maar theorieen,meningen ideen en/of fantasie.
Dat weten we allemaal,
In the new 'reality' we will be living in,nothing will be real and everything will be true-David A.McGowan
Why do some people not credit the origin of the quotes they use under their posts?- Tingo
Why do some people not credit the origin of the quotes they use under their posts?- Tingo
Een wetenschappelijke theorie is heel wat anders.quote:
[..]
Ja ok, maar niet alle theorieen ooit in de praktijk gebruikt worden.
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/theorist
'someone who develops ideas about the explanation for events'
Sommige theorieen blijven maar theorieen,meningen ideen en/of fantasie.
Dat weten we allemaal,
Egregious professor of Cruel and Unusual Geography
Onikaan ni ov dovah
Onikaan ni ov dovah
Als je het niet meer begrijpt begin je dit riedeltje maar weer overnieuw.quote:
Maybe the nukist canp could post a straightforward (specific where necessary) list of the reasons why they believe the atomic bomb story. A list that the non-scientfiically-minded amongst us might understand. Have a collective think about it. I'd be glad to read it. Take your time.
Fyn weekend allemaal.
Je maakt heel duidelijk dat je geen flauw benul hebt van wat een wetenschappelijke theorie is, noch dat je enig besef hebt hoe bewijslast werkt, en dat is precies waarom een inhoudelijke discussie met jou totaal geen nut heeft.[ Bericht 6% gewijzigd door SuperHartje op 14-07-2019 18:39:27 ]
Oh really and who came up with that? A scientist, a scientistic theorist and/or a scientistic propagandist/ PR man?quote:
[..]
Een wetenschappelijke theorie is heel wat anders.
The vast majority of people do not understand 'scientific' theory or 'atomic' science, yet we are supposed and/or expected to accept it all as 'real', even if the claims in a story are in any way questionable.
From wiki:
'A scientific theory is an explanation of an aspect of the natural world that can be repeatedly tested and verified in accordance with the scientific method, using accepted protocols of observation, measurement, and evaluation of results. Where possible, theories are tested under controlled conditions in an experiment.'
All the more reason to not believe the 'atomic' bomb nonsense then...depending on if you think scientific theory makes those ridiculous propaganda films etc. suddenly appear to be believable.
In the new 'reality' we will be living in,nothing will be real and everything will be true-David A.McGowan
Why do some people not credit the origin of the quotes they use under their posts?- Tingo
Why do some people not credit the origin of the quotes they use under their posts?- Tingo
Taught/told at school.quote:Op zondag 14 juli 2019 10:55 schreef illusions het volgende:
[..]
Als je het niet meer begrijpt begin je dit riedeltje maar weer overnieuw.
Saw it on TV documentaries.
Read books/ articles about it.
Some scientists said so.
Blind trust.
But please be more specific if you can.
In the new 'reality' we will be living in,nothing will be real and everything will be true-David A.McGowan
Why do some people not credit the origin of the quotes they use under their posts?- Tingo
Why do some people not credit the origin of the quotes they use under their posts?- Tingo
Oke danquote:In verschillende topics, word er naar voren geschoven dat Atoom wapens onzin zijn.
Verdere info is eigenlijk niet nodig!
Waarop is jouw info dan gebaseerd?quote:
[..]
Taught/told at school.
Saw it on TV documentaries.
Read books/ articles about it.
Some scientists said so.
Blind trust.
But please be more specific if you can.
Precies, veel meer dus dan "maar een theorie"!quote:
[..]
Oh really and who came up with that? A scientist, a scientistic theorist and/or a scientistic propagandist/ PR man?
The vast majority of people do not understand 'scientific' theory or 'atomic' science, yet we are supposed and/or expected to accept it all as 'real', even if the claims in a story are in any way questionable.
From wiki:
'A scientific theory is an explanation of an aspect of the natural world that can be repeatedly tested and verified in accordance with the scientific method, using accepted protocols of observation, measurement, and evaluation of results. Where possible, theories are tested under controlled conditions in an experiment.'
And why is that? Het is gebaseerd op wetenschappelijke theorie die meerdere experimentele resultaten heeft doorstaan. Volgens jouw manier van redeneren zijn computers ook een hoax.quote:All the more reason to not believe the 'atomic' bomb nonsense then...depending on if you think scientific theory makes those ridiculous propaganda films etc. suddenly appear to be believable.
Egregious professor of Cruel and Unusual Geography
Onikaan ni ov dovah
Onikaan ni ov dovah
Eh nee, als je echt wil kan je zelf gewoon delen hiervan testen. Dat is het mooie van wetenschap.quote:
[..]
Taught/told at school.
Saw it on TV documentaries.
Read books/ articles about it.
Some scientists said so.
Blind trust.
But please be more specific if you can.
Egregious professor of Cruel and Unusual Geography
Onikaan ni ov dovah
Onikaan ni ov dovah
Practice what you preach. Dat lijk je maar niet te kunnen, want als er een wetenschappelijk feit uit jouw mond komt weet ik zeker dat we daar internationaal een vrije dag voor krijgen.quote:
[..]
Taught/told at school.
Saw it on TV documentaries.
Read books/ articles about it.
Some scientists said so.
Blind trust.
But please be more specific if you can.
How about _every_ fucking scientist, and every scientist after that? Alleen jij lijkt niet mee te willen doen. Iedereen gaat elkaars theorieën na, en als er iets niet klopt wordt dat gemeld - dat heet een peer proven theory. Dat jij er niet aan mee wilt doen betekent niet dat wetenschap niet bestaat, dat betekent alleen dat jij niet aan wetenschap meedoet.quote:
[..]
Oh really and who came up with that? A scientist, a scientistic theorist and/or a scientistic propagandist/ PR man?
Hier ligt het knelpunt waar je je telkens aan onttrekt en waarom je geen enkele wetenschappelijke bron accepteert. Als je op die manier de waarheid achterna wilt gaan heb je zelf verreikt uranium nodig, en ik zou dat niet in jouw handen vertrouwen.quote:
A scientific theory is an explanation of an aspect of the natural world that can be repeatedly tested and verified in accordance with the scientific method
Verreikt ja? Jfc...quote:
[..]
Hier ligt het knelpunt waar je je telkens aan onttrekt en waarom je geen enkele wetenschappelijke bron accepteert. Als je op die manier de waarheid achterna wilt gaan heb je zelf verreikt uranium nodig, en ik zou dat niet in jouw handen vertrouwen.
"We aren't people, we are text." - Japanman Sakyusan -
Heb je naast spelfoutjes ook nog inhoudelijk iets te melden of ga je het bij kommaneuken houden?quote:
Bepaalde feiten - je kan die in m'n OP zien.quote:
Edit: Feel free to point out where I am wrong...or why you think the 'atomic' bomb stories are in any way true.Make a little list - I'd be very glad to read it. It would perhaps stimulate the 'discussion' here. It seems like other users here are a bit shy, but more than likely unable to state anything to back up their opinions in reasonable manner.
[ Bericht 13% gewijzigd door Tingo op 19-07-2019 01:06:48 ]
In the new 'reality' we will be living in,nothing will be real and everything will be true-David A.McGowan
Why do some people not credit the origin of the quotes they use under their posts?- Tingo
Why do some people not credit the origin of the quotes they use under their posts?- Tingo
"Feiten"quote:
[..]
Bepaalde feiten - je kan die in m'n OP zien.
No- for the non-scientistically minded amongst us is it about trust in what the military intelligence, mainstream media/history books and a few corrupt scientists have claimed.quote:
[..]
Precies, veel meer dus dan "maar een theorie"!
[..]
Het is gebaseerd op wetenschappelijke theorie die meerdere experimentele resultaten heeft doorstaan. Volgens jouw manier van redeneren zijn computers ook een hoax.
Re : Atomic bombs - 'Scientific theory' seems to be about as trustworthy as the STOOPID propaganda films which you seem to believe and (quite hilariously) aggressively defend.
'Electro-magnetic pulse bombs' (delivered by 'terrorist' balloons according to some claims)
'nuclear terrorism'
'low background steel'
Whatever next!?
In the new 'reality' we will be living in,nothing will be real and everything will be true-David A.McGowan
Why do some people not credit the origin of the quotes they use under their posts?- Tingo
Why do some people not credit the origin of the quotes they use under their posts?- Tingo
