SiriusMrE's Comments (164)

“Anybody else reminded of comets?

"If galaxies within a cluster are oppositely charged from the cluster core, the core will pull them in toward the region of greatest charge density: they will experience 'anomalous velocity.' If there are regions of charge separation within a galaxy..., then the material that is the same polarity as the cluster core will be blown back and away, again much like the coma and tail of a comet in the Solar System."
Cometary Galaxies: http://thunderbolts.info/tpod/2009/arch09/091005galaxies.htm”

“"As of last week, scientists were still looking for where the meteor may have landed, according to the Telegraph. "

They may never find a crater with a big meteorite in it. They may find a new crater, or they may find a new meteorite; but, probably not both:

"The lightning hypothesis explains many long-standing mysteries about impacts of all sizes: why meteors can sometimes be heard at the same time they are seen; why the Tunguska event of 1908 left no meteoritic remains; why the 88 ton Hoba meteorite (the size of a family car) didn't form a crater at all; and why the spectacular collision of comet Shoemaker-Levy-9 with Jupiter produced flashes much earlier and bigger than expected."
http://thunderbolts.info/tpod/2004/arch/041119meteorite.htm

And:

"Do meteors burn up from air friction or from electrical discharges sparked by short-circuiting a double layer? Are the streaks of light hot air or lightning? Are the noises shock waves or electrically transduced sounds? Are meteorites etched by friction or by electrical discharge machining? Are they slowed to a soft landing by air resistance or by electrical forces? Why do we find meteorites where there are no craters and craters where there are no meteorites? Is 'impact' an obsolete idea to be replaced with 'arc scar?'"
http://thunderbolts.info/tpod/2005/arch05/050209meteorite.htm”

“Agreed. And some of the behavior of the "high priests" of astronomy--shutting down alternative ideas and innovation (see Halton Arp http://www.electric-cosmos.org/arp.htmm], for one)--is reminiscent of some of the behavior of some religious authorities throughout history.”

“Exactly! Even Edwin Hubble himself warned against taking red-shift to mean velocity/distance.”

“Exactly. A truly open-minded response...”

“Yes, this is interesting. Like Star Trek or Babylon 5 are interesting: as science fiction.

What if the consensus opinion about novae and supernovae is completely wrong? This supernova is NOT "MYSTERIOUS," as the article's headline blares. The reality is that the observations do not fit the theory; that's what has them scratching their heads. Maybe it's not NGC1821 that's the problem, maybe the basic assumptions (developed during the gas-light era) that Dr. Poznanski and his colleagues bring to the observation of this object preclude them from seeing what is actually going on.

"Instead of mechanical action and imploding gas, [NGC1821] was created when an influx of electric current exceeded a critical value and was unable to maintain a stable connection with the galactic circuit. The break in the circuit caused the star to short-out and explode, just like an electric circuit here on Earth can suddenly explode when too much current flows through it."
http://thunderbolts.info/tpod/2009/arch09/090820double.htm”

“@ThermoChemist: "Science is answers that must always be questioned."
@Hirnlego: "What scientists know can become boring..science thrives on the unknowable which it seeks to some light on."

IF ONLY! How many times will the "Big Bang" FAIL to predict discoveries before astronomers start asking some REAL questions?

"Electricity exists in space. Magnetic fields detected in space can only be generated by electric currents. Radio telescopes routinely map galactic magnetic fields and their field configuration matches that found in plasma cosmology experiments. If science were the advertised open pursuit of truth, we should expect big bang cosmologists to be rushing to the plasma labs. Not a bit of it. They are principally theoretical mathematicians. We strike the artificial modern barrier of specialism. The cultural historian, Jaques Barzun, defined specialism as 'a piece of etiquette which decrees that no specialist shall bother with the concerns of another, lest he be thought intruding and be shown up as ignorant. Specialism is born of what the philosopher Arthur Balfour called "the pernicious doctrine that superficial knowledge is worse than no knowledge at all." Rampant specialism, an arbitrary and purely social evil, is not recognized for the crabbed guild spirit that it is, and few are bold enough to say that carving out a small domain and exhausting its soil affords as much chance for protected irresponsibility as for scientific thoroughness.' —Science: the glorious entertainment. "
http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=wxse6f8q&keywords=simple#dest”

“It looks like they were inspired by the ballet en pointe position...”

“"A toroid of charged particles around Saturn could indicate electrical discharges from the planet."
http://thunderbolts.info/tpod/2008/arch08/080306plasmaring.htm

Also: "Now the giant Aericebo Radio observatory (backdrop for many high-tech action scenes in the movies), has 'looked' at Iapetus with its radar 'eye' and has 'seen' a uniformly bright surface instead of the half-and-half view that our telescopes show. The bright side of Iapetus is darker in radar than in visible light, while the dark side is lighter."
http://thunderbolts.info/tpod/2004/arch/041220iapetus-eye.htm”

“Was she REALLY pantie-less? I mean, who goes commando to a DANCE audition?!”

“Sick, sad world...”

“That makes two of us, Kelly!”

“Agreed. These are amazing images. I never have a problem with the engineering and technology that produces these stunning photos or other more stunning data. My issue has been with the science used to interpret them. See the link below for a cool article that explains what we might actually be looking at here (in pic #1, above):

"[P]lasma cosmologists don't have to guess [why these objects have a distinct bipolar symmetry]. They know what the three-dimensional geometry implies. The bipolar hourglass shape is a stellar circuit made visible. The 'combs' are Birkeland current filaments in a Z-pinch configuration, so it can be confidently predicted that their number will match the sequence found experimentally."
http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=7hjpuqz9”

“Are you sure that the ancients worshiped our current sun, Sol? Many interdisciplinary scientists are not so sure.

Here's an interesting video that raises some compelling questions: When Saturn Ruled the World -- http://www.thunderbolts.info/featured_media.htm#wsrtw”

“Just because they CAN, does it mean that they SHOULD? This is very troubling, given the fact that no one seems to REALLY know how the whole life thing works. I mean, for crying out loud, most geneticists seem to believe that our DNA is mostly "junk." The hubris of this is stunning. Just because they do not understand fully how it works does not mean that it is "junk!"

This is just one of the many blind spots that are bound to make these types of efforts seem even more monstrous and misguided in near-future hindsight than they do now.”

“"On December 21st 2012 the Long Count Calendar used by the ancient Meso-American peoples such as the Maya, Aztec, Toltec and Olmec will end one great cycle of 13 Baktun (5125.26 years). The creators of this system were able to calculate and track interesting cycles of nature such as eclipse cosmic alignment and conjunctions."
http://2012rising.com/article/the-galactic-alignment-in-2012-part-1”

“"University of Maryland astronomer Douglas Hamilton questioned whether there was another explanation. While it is likely that this is a suicidal planet, Hamilton said it is also possible that some basic physics calculations that all astronomers rely on could be dead wrong."

WOW! I find myself agreeing with Mr. (Dr?) Hamilton here! I didn't even have to link an article to the Thunderbolts site! The admission of possible ineptitude comes right in the article. At least he's questioning whether there is another explanation, which is more than can be said of most of the astronomical orthodoxy.

Further:
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2009/arch09/090608zones.htm”

“Hey, kettle? It's for you; it's the pot. He says you're black.”

“Also, do not forget the amazing initial results of the Stardust mission.

"The first results from NASA's Stardust mission are in, leaving mission scientists in a state of shock and awe. The tiny fragments of comet dust brought back to Earth did not accrete in the cold of space, but were formed under 'astonishingly' high temperatures.

"It seems that the gulf between the impressive successes of modern technology and the depressing failure of theory has grown by another giant leap."
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2006/arch06/060316stardust.htm”

“Also, FWIW, at one time, most folks were not "buying " the fact that the Earth orbits the Sun...”

“I understand that it is tough to move from one paradigm to another. I also applaud your open-mindedness. Continue seeking the answers to your questions on that site as well as their affiliated sites. Eventually, you will start to understand more fully...”

“Well, as always, there's another way to look at this whole issue:

"In fact, our planet may not be so vulnerable to a globally-devastating event as astronomers have led us to believe. From the Electric Universe perspective, as explained by Wallace Thornhill, Earth, the asteroids, and comets are charged bodies moving in the electric field of the Sun. Thornhill believes that the charge difference between these bodies provides the earth with a natural defense against asteroids and comets, particularly very large ones. When an asteroid or comet enters the electric field of the Earth, which is contained within its 'magnetosphere,' or more accurately-plasma sheath, there will be a powerful discharge between the two bodies. (See earlier TPODs on the Tunguska event and the Chicago Fire.)

"[...]

"This is not to say that the Electric theorists believe comets and asteroids pose no threat to human beings. But the havoc these bodies might wreak would likely be limited to localized disasters—perhaps a series of Tunguska-like events producing regional devastation with falls of sand and dust, perhaps electrical craters, fires and earthquakes, but no single impact crater at all. The devastation of a global extinction requires an encounter with something much larger than a puny comet or asteroid. In all likelihood, it requires electrical exchanges with a body the size of a planet."
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2006/arch06/060712asteroid.htm”

“FWIW, what if asteroids are not loose conglomerations of pebbles ad dust?

"Current asteroid composition and formation estimates are largely based on the anomalous cratering that each one exhibits. Images of Asteroids 253 Mathilde, 243 Ida, and 433 Eros reveal them to be heavily pock marked with craters large and small, prompting scientists to speculate that they are really loose conglomerations of rocks and soil, rather like a big gravel pit in space. Because they were not blown apart from meteoric impacts, say astrophysicists, they most likely 'absorbed' the energy in the same way as a pile of sand will cushion the shock when hit by a stone. But does the gravel pit hypothesis fit the facts or should we look for one that does not depend on revision each time some new discovery sends a spanner into the works?"
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2008/arch08/080910rosetta.htm”

“Really? One's voice needn't be "liberal elite" in order to be intelligent and coherent--although, these days, they seem to be the only ones. These people ARE stupid! And so are you if you fall for this corporate mind game. Pathetic.

Did you also decry the "closed door policy" at Bush's "town hall meetings?" Hm, probably not.”

“And for you: "Since 'skepticism' properly refers to doubt rather than denial — nonbelief rather than belief — critics who take the negative rather than an agnostic position but still call themselves 'skeptics' are actually pseudo-skeptics."
http://www.plasma-universe.com/index.php/Pseudoskepticism”