I always thought the moon landing videos were shot in a CIA studio in the Bel Air neighborhood of Los Angeles a Laurel Canyon road address. Selected because the studio was equi distance from MGM in Culver City. Fox in WLA paramount in Central Los Angeles and Disney and other studios in Burbank and Studio. city

Convenient commute for the crew, director actors and the crew who made the costumes. The space suits were sewn from wedding dress fabric from that big fabric store at Fairfax and Third st.

That’s what Lilienthal did, he observed storks which were plentiful in Germany and could fly very slowly.

Lilienthal flew successfully with a glider, he also experimented with a small CO2 motor on his chest.

An aviation museum in western New York state gave Lilienthal extensive credit for his pioneering work. I forgot which museum, we visited a bunch of them that day. It probably was the one with the glider airfield; we couldn’t fly that day because the cloud cover was too low.

The Mayflower Bradford Party also was under contract to hand over 100% of their production to the financiers of their journey for I think their first seven years in/near the Jamestown settlement, and then most of it (I can’t remember the percentage but it was well over 50) for all subsequent years.

This is what we call as slavery.

Do you think they were on a religious mission? Or a survival mission?

The Mayflower landed a long distance north of Jamestown in what’s now called Provincetown, Massachusetts. Outside England’s jurisdiction. And too far from Jamestown to bully.

The boat and its crew almost didn’t survive the journey.

And the Bradford Party did live in Leiden Holland for some years before returning to SW England (to protect their kids from stuff like alcoholism and worse and becauseworking seven days a week to pay their owners more room and board than they could afford) and entering into the contract that was designed to enslave them.

Thanks for the essay on scientific frauds, which irreproducibility proves is the rule, and doubly so today, and hardly an exception. When it comes to frauds with catastrophic consequences for Western Civilization, I’d have chosen Einstein, Marx, and Freud, as well as the grotesque exaggerations of that Holocaust fairytale arising in Jewish mysticism with so little grounding in reality.

I’ve only read through a few of the ass-kissing exonerations of Einstein that somehow come out of the woodwork by some strange force—where do these jerks get the time for this?—, yet these defenses of Einstein are today as laughable and stale as yesterday’s defenses of Marx and Freud. No serious person today recognizes Einstein as anything but the self-promoting plagiarist he was.

If you think a rudimentary Bradley-Terry algorithm is some platonic perfection of measuring talent, you’re a complete moron.

Abbos have zero genetic relation to niggers. They’re pajeets who got lost in a canoe and wound up at the southernmost reachable island.

musician here:

ARE YOU SERIOUS ABOUT BOB DYLAN?

egads man…Dylan is a hack. can’t even play harmonica better than a kindergartner.
Don’t even get me started on his “vocal” skillz (hint: he has none).

The dude completely admits he is of the devil.

So yeah…maybe don’t use Dylan as ANY type of example of ANYTHING.

Interesting…

…now do Steve Jobs (put his name on every patent application that his wagies filed, and Wozniak did all the actual work) and Elondouche Musk (pushed his way into the company and sidelined the acutal founders)

The article is, unfortunately, every bit as rhetorical and rationalizing as any of the myths it portrays.

1: Every cthonic country in the world is “founded on myth”. Virtually all of the older non-cthonic ones are too.

2: Myth doesn’t mean what pretty much everyone has come to presume it does. It means “what is said”. Every country that has an older oral tradition than a written one is founded on myths. That doesn’t make myths even wrong, it just means they’re harder to trace and therefore it is assumed more often exaggerated, fabricated, or lost.

In contrast, practically everything else is either baseless or founded on legends, because legends are literally the written equivalent of myths. This article, and what I’m writing, for example, are legendaria as soon as the writers pass off the mortal coil.

Modern society has operated on every bit as many superstitions and delusions as many older. The great differences between now and any other time is that it isn’t far enough in the future yet to have even decent hindsight on now, and that vast communication networks mean that every forger/scammer/flim-flammer now has a broad voice, when before many couldn’t have afforded to spread their BS wide.

If you want to be extra pointed about it, the word “modern” is practically a synonym for “affected”, “touched”. or “altered”. In addition we live on the tail end of the most materially abundant period in history up to now, so we’re almost certainly more deluded than the average historical society simply because God through nature hasn’t got around to pruning our fools recently.

I made a quite detailed criticism of relativity two comments above
https://www.unz.com/estriker/jewish-brilliance-synthetic-like-zirconia/#comment-4354388

What a stupid article. I thought I was going to get some facts about Einstein being a fraud. Instead I get a midwit interpretation of Relativity.

Yeah sure Jews operate more abstractly, doesn’t mean they’re wrong on relativity. Relativity has solved problems that were the puzzles of their time, for example the changing of mercury’s orbit.

And I do believe that Einstein basically plagiarized Poincaré, who was a genius. So did the gaul Poincaré create an “abstract” theory which goes against all European thought? Or was it Kosher till Einstein Ctrl-C Ctrl-V’d dat mufucka

I guess I can’t expect every article on this site to be good

What Land Rover type vehicles existed at the time of the Boer War?

How about giving the design of birds wings priority?

I don’t know if nuclear bombs are real, like most people, I just go by what I’ve read, been told and seen on television. It looks like we might find out once and for all if they’re real because Israel is just itching to attack Iran, and if they have nukes, they’d have no hesitation to use them because they’re leaders are batshit crazy.

“To this day the Queen refuses to acknowledge the crime, let alone offer compensation.”

Hard for her to do anything now, she’s dead.

Elisha Gray had his own version of the telephone but didn’t get credit for it because Bell’s father-in-law (a patent attorney) got the patent application in earlier than Gray.

The invention of the telephone can be credited to a number of people, including Bell, but this should not detract from the fact that Bell was an inventor of note. He worked on many things, including the Hydrofoil and his plane made the first documented, powered, heavier-than-air flight in Canada in 1909.

” Pilgrims left on Mayfair not because they were persecuted”

Mayfair was a British men’s magazine named after a district of London.

‘There are only two nations in the world whose existence seems to be founded primarily on historical myths. ‘

! Almost every modern nation relies on a ‘history’ that is at best an outrageous simplification and at worst an outright fabrication. I don’t particularly want to offend anyone by naming names — but a good dozen examples immediately come to mind. The Japanese deciding that they are all descendants of the Sun Goddess Ameratsu would seem to be better than average. After all, you can’t prove they’re not.

Edison was a showman, huckster and promoter who took credit for inventions created by others as his own. Edison’s sole, and greatest accomplishment was the creation of the first modern-day research laboratory.
Shortly after immigrating to the USA, Tesla did engineering work for Edison, who promised to pay Tesla $25,000 for one year’s work. When Tesla demanded his money, Edison remarked that he was “just joking�. Hence, the “split� with Edison.
Edison had outdated ideas on transmission of electrical power, promoting his DC system, which necessitated power plants on “every corner�. It was Tesla, who came up with the transmission of electric power using alternating current (AC), stepping up the voltage, and reducing the current at the source for long distance power transmission, stepping down the voltage, and stepping up the current at the destination. This polyphase system made it possible to transmit electrical power over long distances. For more on this, google “the war of the currents�, where Edison, the showman electrocuted elephants in order to discredit Tesla,s AC system.
Tesla saw his inventions as improving the lot of mankind. In fact, Tesla rescinded his royalty payments on his polyphase electric motors when Westinghouse had financial difficulties.
Tesla was a somewhat strange and quirky individual, but had a much greater scientific and analytical mind than Edison could ever hope to achieve.
It is interesting to note, that upon Tesla’s death, the US government seized all of his scientific papers and writings.

Most Marxists are Talmudists, assisted by their white bit**es. So yeah, white power in kissing the Marxists (Talmudists) boots. Ignorance is not blitz. Has any one notice walking around the big cities, how most whites are so effeminate? Pansies walking around with their headphones on, and totally ignorant of what is going on. I see blacks walking around like wolves on a prowl, and whites totally sheeply. I dont know in other White countries, but in the US, that is the view you get just paying attention to people around you.

I believe Elephant tusks were carried out of hinterlands on the shoulders of Black slaves- into the 1950s.
Sorry, I’m too lazy to look up my source. I ain’t writin a book. Maybe I’ll get to it.

I have proven that electrical energy can be economically transmitted without wires to any terrestrial distance with a loss not exceeding a small fraction of 1%. This conquest of distance will promote peace. Electricity will enable us to disseminate intelligence, transmit power and transport goods. Within a few years a simple and inexpensive device that is readily carried about will enable one to receive, on land or at sea, the principal news, speeches or music from any region of the globe. -Nikolai Tesla, article, 1905

This so-called telephone has too many shortcomings. -Western Union, 1876

There is not the slightest indication that nuclear energy will ever be obtainable. It would require that the atom be shattered at will. -Albert Einstein, quoted in Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 1934

If all the American media could be shut down totally for six months, Americans would begin to regain their sanity, all the politicians and corporate executives would be hung from trees, and the nation would stop collapsing. But it’s too late now. That will never happen.

One thing I do know for sure is that you are a paid shill of the CCP. Yet here you are claiming to know the truth the real truth and nothing but the truth. That the US is the real evil that we have been propagandized into oblivion.

Yeah right. How much do they pay you to say the shit you say? Do you think Propaganda goes both ways. Oh let me guess.

You are the real deal. We are delusional. By the Jews, and who else……

Hilarious on steroids. Propaganda = Larry Romanfuck. Look at all these gullible people lapping up your shit.

Since you brought it up, I’ve figured out the real story of George Washington and the cherry tree. The cherry tree was cut down by a eleven-year-old slave boy in a dissociative fit. George who 12 at the time came upon the boy and tree. The boy said the George, “I chopped down the tree. What’s master going do to me? Help me, George.”

George tells him, “Don’t worry little brother. Nothing will happen to you.

Later in the day, George’s dad finds out about the cherry and launches his investigation.

George tell his dad, “I cannot tell a lie. I chopped down the cherry tree.”

His dad tries to shake George out of the story, but no matter what he does, George stick to the story.

Finally, his dad gives up, slaps George on the back and says, “Outstanding. You’re going to be great man someday.”

Just to remind myself that you are a frivolous troll who may say some stimulating things but none that should be trusted I Googled

This is England’s war, and the purpose is the destruction of Germany

which you clearly identify by implication as a Churchill quote.

Nothing. So I put it again into Duck Duck Go. Again, nothing.

Why do you say “fraud”? It looks like UR’s bad tradition of harbouring people who toss about the word “lie” lightly.

Jews rule CERN now.

If no distinction is “holy” then distinction is “evil”. Thus for things to be corrected all must go back to “nothingness” to recreate the ONE which seems to have blew-up into “shards” in a “big bang” catastrophe. This is Pan-Deistic and is an anti-Nature, anti-material, anti-life.. an anti-existence itself outlook, IMO. Not good.

Your summary of Meucci vs. Bell is somewhat at variance with the source you cite (which notably mentions no linkage between Bell and Western Union). A more detailed account, which is essentially in tune with your summary, is to be found at https://sites.google.com/site/3esoanasanchezplaza/meucci. The Guardian (of all places) also had an article strongly indicting Bell, but it is much less detailed and somewhat sloppy.

hit, nail, the ,on , the , head … succinctly put

Concentration camps, in the modern era, aren’t the brainchild of Germany or Japan. The British Empire, as savage as any other, invented concentration camps to deal with the Boers in Southern Africa.

this often repeated claim is pure nonsense, the British guilty of many things especially the camps in Kenya during the mau mau uprisings of the 1950’s being one of the most heinous, a simple google search dispels the above “fact”. Both the US and Spain beat the British in this particular race with concentration camps for the american Indians 40 years previous, plus Cuba and the Philippines prior to 1900 .

There is also another claim to the coca cola legend contained in the excellent book ” cocaine a definitive history” by Dominic Streatfield where a drink named Vin Mariani was it’s predecessor which was created in the 1860’s in corsica then sold to pemberton, as for the truth who knows…….

The continuing dominance of GR is a huge problem for physics, since the relativistic conceptual base of both special and general relativity is almost certainly a fundamentally wrong model of physical reality.

Let’s take a look at the development of relativity: The assumption in the 19th century was that light is a wave that is traveling through a hypothetical ether, analogous to sound waves through a medium like air or water. The famous Michelson-Morey experiment tested this assumption by comparing the time needed for light to propagate a certain distance both in the direction of the movement of the earth around the sun and that perpendicular to it. The expectation was that the times would be different, since in the direction of the movement the rate of the movement would be either added or subtracted to the speed of the light. In fact, however, the times were identical. The solution proposed by Lorentz was the assumption that the measurement apparatus did undergo a small compensating length contraction in the direction of the movement. Later experiments like that by Rayleigh and Brace made it clear that in addition also clocks would need to run slower.

Einstein was a physicist not a mathematician. This distinction is largely lost on non-theoreticians, but very relevant to this discussion. His remarkable insight came in almost every case from reformulating existing problems in such a way as to better understand them. This is no small feat, as most problem-solving is some form of model building. Another good example of a physicist who made large contributions in terms of conceptual simplifications (arguably containing no new physics) was Richard Feynmann, e.g. path integrals and Feynmann diagrams.

In a single year (aka annus mirabilis) Einstein essentially founded seminal ideas for no less than four entirely new fields. Indeed much of the math was already known or relatively simple (and his apparent lack of citations is a blemish) but one would have to be a fool to dismiss new concepts such as the mathematical foundation for Brownian motion (essentially stochastic calculus), scattering theory, the quantization of light, or the equivalence of time and space. Yes, the math was there in the latter case, but conceptually it was a huge leap to suggest such a thing (even if in _hindsight_ the math was there all along). In fact, this might even be his shakiest if most famous amongst his seminal ideas (as one can in principle formulate alternative theories – see e.g. works of Unzicker – but much of physics is about original and challenging perspectives).

So does it matter that he wasn’t as pure a mathematician as some of his peers? Well certainly he could kick any of your asses at math :D. Even physicists today (such as myself) are quite often too specialized to compare to the mathematical knowledge that even someone as “poor” as Einstein would have had. So even if thinking visually and conceptually was some kind of fault, or key insights in that realm, it would still miss the point of the profoundness of his ideas which had huge influence both in physics and in math.

An obvious example is general relativity. Einstein had already worked out the physical ideas of his theory many years before publishing (it took him ten years). But working out the math was a challenge for him and indeed peers such as Grassmann ended up providing pivotal contributions.

Likewise, arguing that quantum mechanics (which is certainly hard to understand conceptually or visually) was some black spot in his resume is absurd. The deduction of the existence of photons (quanta of light) is possibly the most important concept in physics today (though indeed the photoelectric effect was not quite foolproof – again, in hindsight). He did not stop there. One of the most important concepts in quantum mechanics is the idea that reality on side of the earth can instantly affect something on the other side, or in a different galaxy for that matter. This concept is known as the EPR (Einstein Podolsky and Rosen) paradox, and once again the key conceptualization lead to the rigorous mathematical derivation by John Bell, and later into entanglement theory.

So please do not underestimate the value of clear conceptual, visual thinking, or imagination as Einstein would put it. There is hope even frequenters of euro-centric, self-righteous amalgamation websites can reason about the fundamental ideas belying any robotic or religious mathematical formalities or the world which they describe. And yes, the capitalists the author lists above were frauds (by definition) but Einstein was no capitalist – or lover of Israel for that matter.

My comment from yesterday did not make the grade so I’ll try again.

If Einstein had been a 3rd rate patent office clerk please explain how he was able to present his ideas to top physicists of the day in Europe, answer questions, maintain correspondences on contentious issues, like the long debate with Bohr concerning the meaning of quantum mechanics.

A clerk would not be able to present Einstein’s theories much less answer questions about the meaning of the theories on his feet and through correspondence. Can you picture a clerk wrestling with Niels Bohr? Unless the real author of “Einsteins’ theories dressed up as Einstein for these in-person appearances, Einsteins authorship and brilliance is intact despite the efforts of many who dine on sour grapes. Einstein may not have been a very “good” person, but his work is unassailable.

I consider these simply observations dispositive of the Einstein as a fraud matter. He was not a fraud at all, not in any respect.

I admire your enthusiasm for the early flyboys. However, Wrights contribution was controlled flight, not really sustained flight or distance etc. They got a patent on wing warping. People could get off the ground with one contraption or another, but they were unable to control their flights.

“…published by Italian scientist Olinto De Pretto in 1904…”

Where was this published? Would it be in a journal referenced by the European community of physics…. Or was it published in some arcane magazine, maybe Ladies Home Journal, e.g.

I want a reference for this spurious claim.

Davey Wavey

You assert so much about the Einstein “myth” but provide no evidence or documentation. There are some very clear problems with respect to the thesis that Einstein was a “fraud.”

If Einstein was a 3rd class patent office clerk, WHO then gave his lectures, presented relativity in a number of academic venues, attended physics conferences and participated in lively debates with some of the top physicists of his time, who, btw recognized Einstein’s genius? Who then corresponded with top physicists? Milena (sic) never published, didn’t finish a graduate program and there is not the slightest evidence that she was even interested in physics after separation from Albert. And how on earth did this humble clerk carry on a long term documented debate with Bohr? Who answered questions regarding his theories? A clerk?

I consider these observations dispositive of the Einstein fraud issue.
\
This little taste of reality is not provided to dump on Poincare whose work I much admire. Poincare, however, missed the Relativity boat by hanging on to the ether concept which Einstein ignored but later thought better of.

Einstein was not a mathematician but sufficiently skilled in general. To present his ideas, however, he needed more math. He knew his weakness and implored mathematicians to help him, crying “More math! I need more math!” And Hilbert? He always recognized that general relativity was Einstein’s theory for which he helped with the mathematics of General Relativity. And Einstein made mistakes. OMG mistakes! When one attempts a lot, the possibility of mistakes rises. Unwilling to be wrong, one gets nowhere at all.

Disparaging Einstein is just sore grapes. Inasmuch as you fail with respect to Einstein, I will cannot bother with the remaining exegesis of other “frauds” as I have no confidence that you will really try to get it right.

I have previously agreed about the thesis that Einstein got his equations from Hilbert but reading the following source…
The Relativity of Discovery: Hilbert’s First Note on the Foundations of Physics
Tilman Sauer
Institut für Wissenschaftsgeschichte George August Universität Göttingen
http://cds.cern.ch/record/372465/files/9811050.pdf

.. I have to face the possibility that this may have been misleading.

Hilberts proofs (meaning preliminary version) of his later published versions did not contain the explicit equations.

It is clear that Hilbert had the more advanced theory based on a variational principle but he hesitated to make everything explicit in the course of the parallell development going on involving Einstein and Hilbert.

Letters are missing and that opens up possibilities for speculation no doubt but ultimately Hilbert wasnt seriously questioning Einsteins genuine contributions.

Maybe if Hilbert had been bolder he might have been the winner in the competition.

Something similar holds true about special relativity.

Einstein was the less advanced mathematician but was the only one who dared break with conventional physics by postulating the invariance of the speed of light instead of other explanations.
The constancy=invariance of the speed of light is an unavoidable consequence of the Lorentz transformation since the speed has that singularity.

And yet all the other more advanced mathematicians didnt take that step.

They had all the equations but wanted to preserve the integrity of classical physics.

That was a natural restraint but it turned out that after Einsteins ideas were accepted the community of physicists no longer have that restraint.

So it was about interpretation of formulas but not about explicit formulas per se.

Therefore right or wrong physics has incorporated Einsteins interpretation and disgarded the restraint shown by his mathematical betters.

Theoretically everything may change again and physicists might come to different conclusions but Einstein said every time has its truths or some related phrase and that would still stand.

I respect both Whittaker and Douglas Reed and I suggest that they were both in good faith when they for slightly different reasons criticised Einstein and zionists respectively.
Their world view lacked insights into the secret power lurking behind the scenes in Britain.
(Except of course that they would assume the Rotschilds puppeteered the rest)
I dont think they ever suspected the british elites from having stabbed the jews in the back from early 19th century and all through WW2.
Simply because the british elites anticipated that otherwise the jews wouldnt be solely lojal to the anglosaxons.
The british feared Germany’s competitive advantage and this included the potential move of the center of banking to the continent.

The only party which benefitted from the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Sion was the british and Edward VII was the top freemason until his crowning in 1901, making it plausible that freemason Sergei Nilus was knowingly or not running Edwards errands.

Edward VIII was in younger years guided by Marsden (an associate of Edward VII) who translated the Protocols.
And Edward VIII was probably being manipulated to be a nazi sympathiser.

Since he also saw the carnage of WWI he had a simcere wish to prevent british kids to go through another carnage like that and welcomed an alliance with Hitler against the reds.

Edward VIII, unlike his ancestor Edward VII, probably didnt have full access to the inner circles of power.

Before Carroll Quigley exposed the conspiring anglosaxon elites, characterising that anglosaxon secretive group by saying ‘They are like they want us to believe the communists are”
it wasnt clear to outsiders what had been going on from the beginning of the 20th century and more.
Likwise most of the true 19th century history has been hidden, historians in large measure having sided with british interests.

Since some tend to make Quigley look like a coconspirator it is important to point out that he approved of cooperation among anglosaxons but opposed the secrecy and explained in greater detail than anyone else the concequences of that secrecy.

The Pilgrim society was one of the instruments Britain used to control the US.
They instructed other Pilgrims to dumb down america via the educational system.
Britains elite conspirators wanted the US to be a dumb giant fighting Britains wars.

I leave it to other readers to estimate whether or not they succeeded 🙂

Recently, 2012, such a Pilgrim told americans that it would be better if the US was brought back into the british empire.

WRIGHT BROTHERS yes were the first to invent a plane Edison a notorious crook Pemberton did invent coca cola with cocaine….

the patent system you misunderstand due to low IQ and lack of intelligence the jchews and masons are an international thing spies lies and front and corruption…its communism you should know you are one….

Relative to the Coca Cola, I am pretty sure you are wrong in saying that it was “patented” (by anyone). Patents are only given for a limited time. If Coca Cola was patented, the patent would have expired by now and anyone could make and sell it freely. I think the formula is kept as a trade secret (no expiration date).

Indeed, historical explanations are almost nothing but fraud. LOL Even among the world champions of Chess, claims are made about who the greatest player ever was. Some claim it was Bobby Fischer, others say it was Garry Kasparov, or Alexander Alekine, or Jose Raul Capablanca and others still claim Magnus Carlson the present champion. Yet, a computer has made clear who the greatest was by analyzing the games of the people suggested as the greatest and the result is Paul Charles Morphy, the young Americana lawyer, who lived in the middle part of the nineteenth century. His play was not only beautiful but proved to by the most accurate of any player who ever lived. Morphy was the Mozart of chess, a hundred years ahead of his contemporaries, whom he played with like a cat with a mouse.

Henre Poincare and David Hilbert were the greatest mathematicians of their time. Indeed, Hilbert did everything you said and was fully on par with Einsteins work, possibly ahead of it.

Sorry, indeed Giotto was an European program. But this do not change what I said about Trump being an European Trojan Horse to destroy Wasp America. Because we are talking about aerospace issues, look at the remake of “The Wild Wild West”, when Artemus “invented” an airplane praising Bernoulli, what could be considered despising the memory of the Wright brothers, that would not have happened in the original series of the 1960s.

Of course you will not address to the “moon hoax” since Von Braun was nazi. By the way, notice how American space program gave up gradually from names closer to Wasp progressist mentality as “Pioneer”, “Challenger”, “Vanguard”, and adopted names from Renaissance, as Giotto, Cassini, etc.

Excellent Larry, I hope you do a book on these and the many others the comments section points out. Lindburg never flew the Atlantic. His plane was transported by ship and he only flew the last few miles. The proof: look how clean the plane is behind the engine in the original photos. Normally, after flying just a few hours the body parts would be all black from the carbons from the engine.

Sympthomatic that Pasteur, who stole almost his discoveries, notably from Béchamps, is not mentioned… Only Wasp American inventors and communist Jewish scientists. Perhaps because the lack of humanistic culture of USA does not allow to know that or, most likely, because Pasteur was Roman Catholic and then Trump supporters, aligned with Mitteleuropean elite who wants to destroy the USA with its Trojan Horse do not allow attacks to Roman church.

If all American media could be shut down for a few months, and that will happen due to a stray EMP device having broken all delicate electronic apparatuses leaving only the ordinary electronic grid as it was in the 1950 repairable in a few months, Americans would regain no sanity : all the violence they see on TV and video would materialize all of a sudden in real reality instead of virtual. All political correctness would all of a sudden be taught for want of TV preachers by religious fanatics on the streets organizing lynch-mobs. America would be in civil war and even when then correct the effects of EMP and learn how to repair electronic devices faster it would be too late. The reason why is that most of that regressive behaviour is genetically baked in since two generations : hadn’t there been electronic media America would have never survived the Civil Rights period. The Jews came and gave the country a 75-year delay, hence their exorbitant privileges as of now. Hadn’t they been there with their magical arts based mind control methods nature’s way was permanent civil war.

“Whatever you do, don’t look up at who your real enemies are.”
Look, look, over there, it’s ‘the wicked and manipulative Jews’.
Don’t look here at the US ‘plutocrats’ and the M.I.C., there is nothing to see!

Half the stuff is there because the Einstienian synchronization scheme is a crock of merde. I did go through his synchronization scheme in his special relativity paper sometime back and while it appears to be logical in its conception it makes certain physical assumptions that renders the whole scheme an exercise in tautology masquerading as a physically derived schema . I have no desire to revisit again but I may try sometime later and inform you.

The other half comes from his reliance on the tensor calculus and the old Newtonian idea that particles of light are subject to gravity. Now the Einstein tensor willy-nilly incorporates both mass and radiation as mass elements. It should be a simple exercise in addition to separate out both the mass and mass due to radiation . But this affects curvature which in turn affects the path of radiation. Add in some imagination and you have dark energy, continuous creation of matter a la Hoyle and Narlikar and all the other speculations. I have no desire to deny the cosmologists their Alice in Wonderland playground . But one can see that the field is conducive to extreme speculation by anyone who is a dab hand in approximating the various tensors with more linear functions.

Between these two millstones from SR and GR the minds of the relativists are shaped to a form that they find at home. But methinks such issues as the gravitational effect on satellite clocks can be explicated by the effect on the classical gravitational potential by a suitable Taylor’s expansion. This approximation is the Newtonian equivalent of the falling lift effect in Einstein’s physics.

Which illustrates what has been my point from the beginning : Neither Einstein’s mind games nor his physics are necessary to understand the GPS.

Einstein was right about the Atom, because in reality that to is FALSE! See Vernor Heisenberg’s discovery of Quantum Mechanics putting to bed any real sense of splitting Atoms, although he agreed with Einstein at the time, Being a German, he was overwhelmed by American Intelligence and never spoke against Al out of fear of reprisal IMHO.

Define the Atom, being, that which can not be split and IF possible, how would the chain reaction be stopped without killing the WORLD?? There are NO atomic bombs, that’s another trick by the American Govt to keep a constant state of fear around the world to remain in control. How could Nevada be clear of radiation, and underground testing, what a freaking joke!! Check Galen Windsor the original safety engineer assigned to test uranium and how Nuclear power-plants were developed, it’s all a flat out lie and complete joke of epic proportions.

Responsible I think for a lot of those weighty and learned tomes Ibid and Op.Cit.

That reinforces what I thought was the case. It seems that there is a lot of stuff like that in popular science, conventions or just-so stories that are passed around by people so they can feel smart.

No it wouldn’t hurt, toothless yokel.

As for a void being the true or higher state of being, it is merely wishful thinking. The self cannot be reduced, it is the witness of all things. Nirvana is a fullness to which everything attains.

Buddha said something about he achieved nothing (I wonder if such negative statements were dispiriting to his disciples). I interpret it as meaning that his final realization was that everything was perfect and always had been, and even his achievements were revealed to be unreal in the light of true knowledge.

I feel that we are running in a circle.
Matter with a speed greater than light has -maybe- not so far been observed. To argue that it is not possible because theory, regardless which one, forbids it, and to take the lack of it being observed as a confirmation of theory is circular reasoning. That is acceptable for mathematics with its very few basic statements, but not for science which its attempt to bring order into a seemingly infinite vastness of phenomena which follow apparently some descriptive functions which all go back to experiment at some point (i.e., are empirical at the root).
As far as I know, it is not the mass, but the inertia that grows to infinity if mass approaches infinite speed, and that has been shown only for charged particles to be the case. That could be the reflection of a decreasing efficiency of energy transfer as the charged particle approaches the speed of the accelerating medium.
What experiment could be performed to accelerate a non-charged particle to c or more? I t would be difficult, but of fundamental importance. Has it been attempted?

I pity the author for his opening sentence, it caught unintended attention. America is by far not even the second, third or tenth, but we geddit.
Besides, after much searching for “White” worship examples, I found it only amongst those enamored of Jehova- Jahwe- Jeshua- Satan ilk.
That is the first civilisation of our age based on myth, the so-called “Western” thing, based on “Judeo-Christian values” as if the one did not invent for us the other. Yankee self-delusion is merely narcist dogma, “Western values” promises an eternity of rule under an iron staff. And they insist that some god wrote the programme…
My delusion wins!!!

Special relativity says that the end – moving at the speed of light – is unachievable because the means to achieve it – mass growth tending to infinity therefore energy to propel it tending to infinity as the speed is approached – are impossible. I simply say the end is impossible for matter as we know it regardless of the means, without any assumption regarding “spacetimeâ€�.

Thanks for the conversation MrVoid. I don’t think a name can be condescending, only an attitude. For example, Shlomoh is the same name as Solomon, yet it is used as a slur. It was also the name of the assassinated Soleimani, whom all the Zionist crank yankers on ZeroHedge called General Salami. But I digress. I agree there is no shame in being gay, but considering the vitriol that comes at gays from conservatives and Christians in America, it should be no surprise that most gays are liberals. They are caught up in the divide and conquer culture war like everybody else. Gays are human, and most humans are quite simply credulous. Gay also has more than one meaning.

So you seem to insinuate that I am condescending to myself by choosing the name troll. But that’s no self-deprecation either. I didn’t choose to be a troll, I was born this way. I used to have my selfie up on ZeroHedge but they banned me for referring to the U.S. government as “fascist globalist neoconservative neoliberal Jewish Nazis” and a “gang of terrorists”. Anyway I am a Scandinavian monster with rainbow hair and I live under a bridge in San Francisco hissing at Christians who pass by on the internet.

As for a void being the true or higher state of being, it is merely wishful thinking. The self cannot be reduced, it is the witness of all things. Nirvana is a fullness to which everything attains.

Hi again “gay troll”. Why have you chosen a condescending name for yourself? I personally have no specific problem with gay men apart from the fact that so many are aligned with the left. When it comes to lifestyles I say let a thousand flowers bloom (although no one should be forced to bake cakes for anyone else IMO). Respect for all points of view should be the reigning idiom of society’s rulers, whoever they are.

Of course, color only exists in the mind; it is a sensation, or representation of the real. In the same way we sense hot and cold, loudness and softness, we smell and taste impressions of chemical configurations.

Or the reverse is true. The physical world could be just something we interpolate from our concious experiences. In other words there might not be a tree falling when we’re not aware of a tree falling. I know that people say that this is just a dorm room debate topic, but what’s called the “unity of conciousness” makes me take the view that conciousness is the creator. It’s that all sense impressions (and everything we are cocnious of) is always unified into a single experience when the nervous system is distributed over space. Many split brain researchers claim that dividing the brain splits conciousness but but there are now some who claim that consiousness does not split. (I can provide links for that but they come straight from Google anyway).

Time is the same kind of sensation: it seems to be fundamentally different from space, but it is not. All past and future states exist eternally. It is only perception that creates the sensation of changing from one state to the next.

I really feel that I’m just a blind man fumbling in the dark with these topics, even though I like to think about them (perhaps more than I should). A lot of Buddhists (of which I am one) say something about a film projecter, etc, but I don’t really know. I just take the view that all phenomena change. I hear that during any experience of egolessness, the concept of transitioning from one thing to another (the sense of time, in other words) is gone, but also the sense of being is gone so there would be nothing to transition. All descriptions of such experience are an ego based, dualistic overlayering.

I may hold forth, existence itself is a fundamental mystery.

It will always be that.

The only logical conclusion to my mind is that there can be no state of nothingness; there can be no beginning, and no end, there can only be a form which is both within me and without me, behind and before. Cogito ergo sum. What else can be known by a human?

Once again, I take something like the opposite view. I think that ultimate reality is like true metaphysical nothingness, so if people ask me how existence came to be I would answer that it never did. Then if they asked me why we have something instead of nothing I would say that reality never did not exist either. The law of the excluded middle never applies and reality always takes advantage, sitting right in the dead middle.

Anyway it’s fun to have these conversations. I may just be a rambling idiot, but we’ve all got more lifetimes to get it right.

it breaks the principle of parsimony to have separate classes of phenomena

And yet this is exactly what perception accomplishes. Perception is the opposite of parsimonious. Thus even in the small spectrum of visible light, which varies only according to wavelength, perception presents us with different classes of color. Of course, color only exists in the mind; it is a sensation, or representation of the real. In the same way we sense hot and cold, loudness and softness, we smell and taste impressions of chemical configurations. Time is the same kind of sensation: it seems to be fundamentally different from space, but it is not. All past and future states exist eternally. It is only perception that creates the sensation of changing from one state to the next. So when I said our mind moves through states of the singularity, understand I mean this is an illusion of human perception. Also realize that to me as a human being, despite any theories I may hold forth, existence itself is a fundamental mystery. The only logical conclusion to my mind is that there can be no state of nothingness; there can be no beginning, and no end, there can only be a form which is both within me and without me, behind and before. Cogito ergo sum. What else can be known by a human?

So you are assuming that there is absolute space with a reference system at rest against which all motions are measured?

My reasoning is that things that are linked by electromagnetic force will no longer be linked by it at speeds greater than the speed of light. The analogy with sound inside a car doesn’t work because there is no material with which you can build your spaceship body to enclose its cabin the way a car body encloses its passenger compartment. Make your car a cabriolet or even better, a motorcycle, and see how sound travels then.

As Henry Ford correctly noted, it’s [history] mostly bunk.

The singularity has the structure of a toroid, a singularity in 3 dimensions would be like a donut with no space in its hole, just a 0 dimensional point.

Time as humans understand it is purely an illusion; bodies do not transition from state to state, all states past and future exist as part of the singularity, it is only our mind that moves through them.

It’s impossible for one thing to change and not others. If something moves through something else, then everything that exists in relation to that thing has also changed. At any rate it breaks the principle of parsimony to have separate classes of phenomena, some eternal and some impermanent.

Another excellent post, as usual.

Thank you, Sir.

Weirdness and controversy in science often is directed at getting funding. Always keep it in the back of your mind that what you are seeing may be directed at getting funding, and has nothing to do with honest science.

“I just don’t know why we conclude that the universe is expanding away from us.”

It’s simple. (‘We’ didn’t conclude that, some one else concluded it.) It’s about FUNDING! More and more federal funding for orbiting observation stations, and bigger and more advanced telescopes, collecting data in more of the electromagnetic spectrum. And it’s really about, increased surveillance of earth, and human activities. More spying. The fancy photos of distant nebulae etc are just window dressing.

The singularity has the structure of a toroid, a singularity in 3 dimensions would be like a donut with no space in its hole, just a 0 dimensional point. The origin of the universe is properly understood to be a singularity. This is also the end of the universe, in fact it is the very nature of the universe. It is not really 0 dimensional, it is a multidimensional form that passes through a 1 dimensional bottleneck. The Big Bang is a true enough theory, but the idea that space is expanding in 3 dimensions makes no sense. In fact the Big Bang was a bidirectional, one dimensional explosion. Now, in one dimension energy can have no wavelength. Furthermore, since the one dimensional Big Bang is perpendicular to the plane of our vision, its cross section is 0 dimensional and therefore invisible. According to our perception of time, the universe develops from a one dimensional origin to a pi dimensional present to an 11(?) dimensional total form. It is the entire form that is the singularity; 0 dimensionality is an illusion. The higher the dimension the slower light travels, the shorter its wavelength. Our visible universe contains 3 perpendicular dimensions, but most of the mass and energy present in the universe is not visible by any means. It is “dark�. It exists beyond a dimensional horizon. It is the future.

Note that the brain has a structure identical to a singularity: two symmetric hemispheres connected by a span. It is true enough that man is made in God’s image. The structure of the brain simulates the structure of the universe, and that is how the universal mind finds itself so often incarnated.

Wouldn’t the forces holding matter together travel at the speed matter does, in the same manner the sound from the car radio travels within the car at the speed of sound and giving no unusual sound phenomena, with the car as the reference,?
Your reasoning would suggest disintegration of matter at the speed of light, but also a gradual disintegration, possibly explosively, as this speed is approached.

As expected I could not make head or tail of the question on FLT. I scanned through stuff like wormholes and alcubierre drives, but could not make any sense of them. IIRC the question of FLT arose in the context two observers moving away from each other? Each would find that time runs either slower or faster in the other’s rest frame, due to the factor v/c appearing, who then is correct. I recall reading a claimed resolution in terms of general relativity. One of the twins slowing and turning around and gaining mass or stuff like that. But it sounded like bullshit to me, Ptolemic epicycles translated into the scholastic mode made more sense. The nearest I can think of that approaches an answer is given by one Eelco Hoogendoorn in,

https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/52249/how-does-faster-than-light-travel-violate-causality

There is a simple answer; faster than light travel does not violate causality.

What faster than light travel does, is contradicts the usual axiomization of relativity; and hence allows you to derive all kinds of paradoxial ‘conclusions’. But shifting the blame on causality is more fashionable convention than anything else.

That is all I am able to contribute.

Time as humans understand it is purely an illusion; bodies do not transition from state to state, all states past and future exist as part of the singularity, it is only our mind that moves through them.

I’m trying to understand this. What do you mean by the “singularity”?

Physics has been practiced for a short time only and it is very likely that discoveries of a fundamental nature will be made in the future. One thing missing is a theory of gravitation that goes beyond a phenomenology of its effects. That alone could lead to new ways of propulsion, or rather, ways of effecting motion in space. As far as I know, no experiments exist that were aiming at achieving speeds approaching that of light in the vacuum that do not involve charged particles. So it would only be correct to say that charged particles cannot be made to move faster than light in accelerators operated with electromagnetic fields which are providing a pushing or pulling force propagating with a maximum of the speed of light.

I just don’t know why we conclude that the universe is expanding away from us.

Well, that is because, although it has been challenged, the “Big Bang” model remains the mainstream and best framework by which the birth of our universe can be explained. After the big explosion, comes the endless entropic expansion.

The Big Bang theory does not rely solely on General Relativity. Its framework is supported by three scientific pillars: (1) General Relativity and the “Redshift” it predicts, (2) Nucleosynthesis and the subsequent observation of large quantities of helium and hydrogen in the universe, and finally, (3) the cosmic microwave background, the “relic radiation”, whose existnace was proved by US physicists Penzias and Wilson (Nobel Prize 1978).

It is worth reminding that it is Belgian physicist Georges Lemaitre who first, in 1931, had the intutition of an initial node of matter exploding and expanding into our universe, another seminal and fundamental idea that was at the time fiercely rejected by Einstein the so-called “all-times genius”, who believed that the universe was static.

The question is, how can we see an object 40 billion light years away if the universe is only 14 billion years old and light obeys a speed limit?

One explanation is that space is expanding, and further space is expanding more rapidly. Does this explanation make sense?

I was a kid when the scientific rage was about the coming ice age when all of a sudden that topic disappeared and it became all about global warming. So what became of the previous prognostications? Nothing but crickets.

I just don’t know why we conclude that the universe is expanding away from us. If we look deep into space and see a highly redshifted object, that is not some live view of a current condition, it is a window into the distant past. It makes no sense to say that the beginning of spacetime is speeding away from us at increasing rate. It makes more sense to say that light used to have a longer wavelength, and therefore used to travel greater distances in the same amount of time. If we look far enough in any direction we should see the very same point: the beginning of time. It is not an edge expanding away from us, it is our origin. Space expands not at the outer boundary but at the inner boundary. It is like water issuing from a fountain. Space expands more slowly than it used to, because it gradually opens up additional dimensions, adding perpendicular axes that effectively slow the propagation of light waves. As time goes on life will find itself in a 4 dimensional universe, then a 5, as light speed continues to slow.

Time as humans understand it is purely an illusion; bodies do not transition from state to state, all states past and future exist as part of the singularity, it is only our mind that moves through them.

Spacetime is toroidal.

I’ll rephrase my previous answer and I’ll try to keep it simple. The question is not whether anything can go faster than light, the question is whether matter as we know it, and of which we are made, can travel faster than light.
Atoms and molecules are held together by weak nuclear interaction and electromagnetism, which is actually now known to be one single interaction often called “electroweak�, while atom’s nucleus are held by strong nuclear interaction. Light is an electromagnetic phenomenon. Electomagnetic phenomenons propagate at the speed of light. It implies that the interaction holding atoms together is occurring at the speed of the light. If you push matter at a greater speed than the speed of the interaction that holds it together, what happens?

You , sir, are not worthy to , even, smell Einstein dirty socks. try , first, to manage the arithmetics of multiplication table.

The Founding fathers considered anyone who wasn’t Anglo Saxon and high born:

“Black�

You have made an evidence free claim, probably to make yourself feeeeel better.

I call BS on you.

The basis of mainstream cosmological theory states that the velocity of a celestial object and its distance from us can be determined by its redshift.

The distinguished astronomer Halton Arp, who wrote the book “Seeing Red,” showed this not to be true. For his heresy, he was banished from telescope time in the U.S. and had to go to Germany for telescope access. Haltonarp.com has many interesting articles.

Carl Sagan, in his book “Cosmos,” had the courage to say “…cases where a galaxy and a quasar, or a pair of galaxies, in apparent physical association, have very different redshifts…If Arp is right, the exotic mechanisms proposed to explain the energy source source of distant quasars—supernova chain reactions, supermassive black holes and the like would prove unnecessary.”

Since Sagan wrote that, highly red-shifted quasars have repeatedly been shown to lie in front of opaque, low red-shifted galaxies, such as the Hubble telescope’s dramatic view of NGC 7319. Since then, Europe’s 3.5 meter Herschel Space Observatory has provided magnificent views of galactic filaments, star-forming structures with stars strung like pearls along the filaments, which extend for tens of light years and astound astronomers by maintaining a consistent width of 0.3 light years along their entire length. This is written up in holoscience.com, 05/09/11, in the article titled “Alfven Triumphs Again.”

More recently, astrophysicist Michael Clarage discusses this and more at Aureon.ca/movies under the titles “The Big Picture” and “How Stars are Formed” and, from the 2018 conference in Bath, England, “New Views of the Interstellar Medium.”

I agree, I don’t see any reason why there would be some hard speed limit on the universe. I think it’s 90% of astronomical motion is unexplained other than through the hand wave known as “dark matter” and “dark energy”. That implies that our physical laws are not adequate, not that there’s some totally invisible particle/force mucking things up. That said, the idea of motion getting exponentially more expensive the faster it is makes perfect sense, so it may be less that the speed of light is a hard limit as it is the highest practical speed things normally can attain. It’s all academic for now though, as even in the far future I doubt we’d ever get a ship much faster than 25% of light speed, and likely the only thing we could send FTL would be signals.

“Thank God I’m white…”

How can you be so sure?

The TRUTH hurts, doesn’t it??
The whole civil-rights charade is based on a fraud.
Thank God I’m white…

Can you provide the evidence to prove your psychotic delusions?

Here is the issue: there is only one observer of reality and it exists at the very center of the universe. To look through space is to look backwards in time. The image of the past becomes smaller (and more redshifted) as it gets older. What exists at the beginning of time and the center of the universe is a singularity. It is the origin of all energy. The fundamental principle of energy is radiation, the propagation of wave forms through space. Light emitted in the observable universe obeys a maximum speed limit; in other words it can only propagate a certain number of wavelengths per second. I submit that at the beginning of time (which is the farthest one can conceivably see through space, in other words the edge of the observable universe) light traveled much faster than it does today. It used to have a much longer wavelength, while always traveling the same number of wavelengths per second. At the boundary of the singularity the wavelength is stretched to infinity; i.e. to a one dimensional vector. We see this head on so it appears to be 0 dimensional. As time passes the dimensionality of the universe evolves, so that from a 1 dimensional origin we currently exist in a pi dimensional universe. The total dimensions of the universe are perhaps 10 or 11 and it is in the inner (I.e., higher) dimensions that dark matter and energy are accounted for. As time goes on the speed of light will continue to slow as we materialize in higher dimensions, the wavelength will get shorter and shorter until at the end of time light will stop moving altogether, it will be again what it always is, a singularity which constitutes the self.

I wonder how certain the tenet that nothing can travel faster than light is. It has only been established that it is only possible to approach the speed of light asymptotically by charged particles in a particle accelerator which transmits its pulling or pushing force by the speed of light.
On the other hand, people who detect through experiment motion faster than light lose their job and are smeared by the job occupants at the universities. Not even an “honest error”, if it had been indeed a mis-measurement, was allowed for the physicist Eredidato who made just such a measurement in 2012. Maybe he is reduced to baking and selling pizza now, the academic mob was coming down hard on him in no time to save the central dogma of the current age and he was dismissed without much ado.
It is not clear to me how such a dogma: “no speed of matter or radiation larger than c (300000 km/sec)” can be reasoned for. If it hasn’t been observed, maybe one should make a serious effort to understand why that might be or hasn’t looked hard enough. A tautological explanation based on a “theory” that rules it out is not satisfactory.

Among greatest frauds: scientific frauds? global warming, HIV/AIDS, and … you name it. No one mentioned global warming above.

Et Al is a mysterious character too. Participating on so many studies yet seldom more than a mention.

The short answer is that you cannot translate matter from point A to point B faster than light can travel from point A to point B.

Thanks, I’ll try to check back in around then!

Please give me sometime to respond. Upto a week in fact. I shall alert you when I have one ready.

The “fraud of all frauds” of the twentieth century is the so-called jewish “holohoaxâ„¢” (oops, I mean “holocaustâ„¢”).

From an engineering standpoint, every claim can be shown to be fraudulent.

Hitting the holohoax (oops I mean “holocaust™�) head-on doesn’t work because of the jew-controlled media which has declared “holocaustianity™� to be the new worldwide “state religion� from which no dissension from its “orthodoxy� is permitted.

The only way to counter “holocaustianity™� is to point out the scientific illogic and engineering impossibility of every “holocaust™� claim.
Let’s look at a number of claims that have been made and have been ingrained in “holocaust™� orthodoxy:

— using “bug spray� (Zyklon B) as an execution agent (ha ha)
—“gas chambers� with ordinary wooden doors, not gas-tight doors
—“gas chambers� with no means to ventilate the chambers after “operation�
—“gas chamber� chimney not connected to anything
—“blood spurting out of the ground� for weeks and months
—“crematoria stacks with visible flames� (not possible) crematoria burn clean
—“thousands of bodies cremated per day� (not possible)
—“multiple bodies� in one “muffle� to “speed up� operations
—“lampshades, soap and shrunken heads�, oh my
—“the ability to tell when jews are being cremated by the smell or color of smoke�
—“claimed burial grounds not being permitted to be disturbed� per jewish “law�

NONE of these claims are possible or valid and can be easily debunked using sound scientific and engineering principles.

I have been thrown out (asked to leave) those “jewish freak shows� called “holocaust™�museums for merely attempting to point out these facts.

How about the American “civil-rights” frauds?

Here are true (corrected) stories about “icons” of the so-called “civil rights” movement:

There is much more to the “Emmett Till” story that is not widely known. Of course, killing him made him into a “martyr” of the black “civil-rights” movement), but–it is not generally known that Emmett Till was a strapping young man of about 160 lbs.–NOT a “little boy” as some media types tried to portray him as.

Till was a known womanizer and attempted to take his cocky “Chicago ways” in dealing with women to the Deep South. He was sent to live with relatives in the South because his Chicago relatives could not handle him.

He had a “cocky attitude” and bragged about “getting it on” with white women–not a good idea in the South. . .

According to published accounts, Mr. Till did not just “whistle” at a white woman, but, on a dare, grabbed, manhandled and fondled a married white woman storekeeper. In Southern culture, this was, and still is, the ultimate form of disrespect.

Despite Mr. Till’s relatives’ attempts to spirit him “out of town” to avoid retribution by the woman’s relatives and townspeople, his cocky attitude “got in the way”.

Despite being given numerous “chances” to apologize for his behavior and walk away, he was defiant to the end. IF he had apologized for his behavior, he would still be alive today. In fact, one of his killers was a black man.

It is interesting to note that Emmett Till’s father was executed by the U S military for multiple rapes. Maybe “the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree” . . .

Rosa Parks was not the “ordinary” black woman that so-called historians made her to be. She was an organizer for the NAACP and was “planted” in order to advance the cause of black “civil-rights” to which she was successful.

Approximately a year previous to Rosa Parks’ “bus ride” and refusal to vacate her seat, a REAL ordinary black woman did the same thing. This black woman received NO publicity or support from the NAACP or other black “civil-rights” organizations. You see, she was an unmarried black woman with children.

According to the black civil-rights crowd, this would not do. They wanted someone who was “squeaky clean” without any “baggage”.

In fact, the “white guy” sitting behind her was part of the “set-up”. He was a UPI reporter, contracted to “stage” the event…not only that, in the photo there is no one else on the bus. Ms. Parks could have sat wherever she wanted.

Hence, Rosa Parks made (fabricated) history . . .

Martin Luther (Michael) King was well-known for frequenting prostitutes, beating and abusing them while exclaiming that he “finally felt like a white man”. His own associates have stated as such. He also plagiarized his college papers and doctoral thesis. Of course, this was overlooked because of his status. Along with Rosa Parks and other “civil-rights” promoters, King was also a communist.

Jesse Jackson used to brag to his associates on how he would spit in the food of white patrons of the restaurant he worked at.

There are many more fabrications of history that were used to lend false “legitimacy” to the so-called “civil-rights” movement . . .

As to the supposed “non-violent” civil-rights “demonstrations”, there was extreme violence committed by the jewish civil-rights workers and their black “pets” against the counter protesting citizens of the various cities that they took place in.

As is presently the case, the “mainstream media” conveniently turned off their cameras in order to “shape the narrative” and to maintain the false illusion that these “demonstrations were “non-violent”. The jewish “civil-rights workers” and their “pets” (blacks) were successful in pushing this false agenda. We are living with the results to this very day…

I meant to hit thanks for that comment, but accidentally hit agree.

I’ve got a question that you might be able to answer: I’ve always heard that one of the reasons (not the only reason) faster than light travel is impossible is that it violates causality, i.e. you would be traveling backwards in time if you did. I’ve heard many explanations for why that is but none ever made any sense. I suspect that it wouldn’t violate causality at all, and that it would only apparently violate it like an optical illusion. Imagine a spaceship instantly teleports 1 light-year away, they could then get a telescope and watch themselves 1 year in the past… But I see no causality violation there, they’re simply seeing a signal that took 1 year to arrive. So the question is, does FTL travel violate causality?