Even NASA 'scientists' have admitted they cannot get past low level orbit. There is no way they can break through a barrier, which is supposedly robust enough to separate the earth's atmosphere, and the 'endless vacuum' of space.
When you ask how propulsion works in space, they simply say "Newton's third law". As if that settles the argument. But it does not. It is still a theory that this works in a vacuum.
As you say in the article, there is nothing for anything to exert force against. So there would be no opposing force. The thrust gas would just be let out into the endless vacuum.
So supposedly a rocket in space is not just sat there motionless. It is hurtling around space. So can anyone tell me how a little rocket can produce enough force to make itself move in some other direction? I.e. to overcome its the motion that 'space' is putting on it.
Quite a lot I think.
Also would require quite a lot of air for this combustion.
Hmmmm. Doesn't seem possible, or explainable to me.
We have never been to space, we don't have the tech now and we certainly didn't 60 years ago (lol).
P.s. it is without a doubt that there is serious engineering ongoing on that barrier. EMF exerted by installations such as HAARP is used. Prior to that, attempts were made with nuclear explosions (see China). Atmospheric anomalies occur due to these efforts. People still have not made that connection, and instead call it "global warming" or whatever other hooey they call it and "protest" against. Then there are the suborbital attempts at "flying in space" by the likes of (Sir) Richard Branson and his catapulted craft that screech through the upper layers of the atmosphere at speeds of 17000 mph. This lunacy causes tremendous shockwaves that result in destructive vortices, such as the Joplin tornado several years ago. And so it goes...
Exactly. That is why i ask the posters these questions, to get them to think and answer for themselves. If you think about angular momentum for instance (making turns in space, as one poster wrote), changing direction, where does this force come from, how is it exerted to cause the rocket to change direction? A rocket is just that, a rocket, it hurtles through space, without the capacity to break, change direction, or land softly. Let alone launch from its landing space again - where are the gas pumps, where is the oxygen, is the surface conducive to launches, etc. The "barrier" you write of, that's what I call the "roof of our house". If you take it down, or poke holes in it, you're in deep trouble.
To be honest, I am not particularly interested in weather the Earth is flat or round. For all intent and purpose it does not matter. Do you have your own Substacks about the topics you like to write about? If so, then we can continue this discussion on your Substacks. If not, could you please start up your own Substacks about the topics you like to write about, Flat Earth and such? I will gladly visit your Substacks and I am sure there are many other people who will visit as well. :-)
Zonder, because you don't seem to understand even the very simple Three Laws of Motion that Isaac Newton documented for humanity in the 1600's, you have disqualified yourself from sharing any other scientific opinions, even if you might be correct about pineal glands and so on. Please retract this article (delete it) because, like Flat Earth, it can be used to mock and dismiss those who are better equipped to question the real motives behind the DOD as the driving institution behind Warp Speed.
Sorry, but I would not waste my time writing this if I didn't care about you as a person, a fellow child of God, and I'm sure you are a well meaning and thoughtful person.
thank you - this was exactly my response as I read that area of Zonders article. Action/reaction. It gets exhausting reacting to the internet, doesn't it .......
In your article, you make a serie of claims that space travel using rocket propulsion is impossible, therefore humans have never achieved it. THis is not true, and immediately raised my eyebrows. The internet is fulll of errors, often accidental but many are just based on suppositions or lack of rigour. Reaction from a thrust motor does not need to push against anything external to the motor in order to generate thrust..... the action of expelling a high speed exhaust of combusted products through a nozzle will allow the reaction to provide thrust.
Thanks for your response. Please do provide (1) the physics behind thrust propulsion in a vacuum. (2) the landing of a rocket propelled by a thrust motor, on a distant object in space, such as the moon. With gratitude.
I often wonder myself... In any case, however, a flat earth seems a bit farfetched to me. This would mean that the universe has a topside and a bottomside, just like the flat earth allegedly has a topside and a bottomside, according to its design, in contrast to a sphere. How does one determine what is top and what is bottom on a flat earth - i.e. why is there something on only one side of the flat earth, why not on both sides of it? How does one determine what is top and what is bottom in an all-directional expanding space, such as is the universe as the container of the 'flat earth'?
Dear Zonder Reden, if you have some time "to waste" (that is, if you want to rack your brains on a topic that cannot be solved) you could read on this link some elaborate theses on why, in reality, the Earth is not a sphere (but it is certainly not flat either).
The Earth IS a sphere... but only FROM OUR point of view.
Here is exposed the thought of the philosopher P. D. Ouspensky, corroborated by some teachings and observations of his teacher G.
These expositions, regardless of whether they are correct or not, offer the possibility of opening ourselves to an "alternative" vision of the reality of the World. In other words, it is not very important to know if what is exposed here is true, or if it is only partially true, or if it is even completely wrong, what is interesting to understand is that certain questions can NEVER be answered reliably. There is only one way to understand these (and other) complex metaphysical issues: enter the Cosmic Consciousness and then the Supermind. I'll tell you right away - it is an almost impossible undertaking... (almost).
As a consequence no theoretical physicist, or mathematician will ever be able to get to the bottom of these questions simply using the human intellect. Furthermore, if you are interested you could also read the entire PDF, but keep in mind that it is only a very sophisticated form of occultism and magic. Some ideas exposed are certainly true, others only partially, and others still are false.
Hi Rafaele, very nice to hear from you! Yes, I am familiar with Gurdiev and Ouspensky. Great that you mention them again! Thank you for your contribution to the endeavors here, and may we meet again at the same place, does not have to be the same hour! :-)
These people find themselves in the rebirth (reincarnation) through "recurrence". This is the direct result of their work of magic. The knowledge here expounded comes both from Islamic Sufism and from some tradition connected with ancient Egypt. In the terms of this teaching the Cosmic Consciousness is represented by the connection with the "higher emotional centre" (of which the "Ānanda" of the Hindus is an aspect), while the Supermind (of which Sri Aurobindo speaks) is represented by the "higher intellectual centre".
I do not know enough to personally comment on the "for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction" portion of your assertions. I do know space is not a vacuum in the strict sense and there is also quite a bit of electromagnetic waves going every which way. My personal take is we're looking at the issue exactly backwards because the world of physicality is an illusion fabricated / assembled by our awareness. This assemblage can be to some degree shared and sustained by those participating, thus creating the illusion of continuity. That said, I am in complete agreement with regards to the "vaccine", and I use the term loosely. I don't believe most people who are on to it are thinking big enough. I believe whoever came up with it knows exactly what it does in the body and it serves multiple purposes. One is to tag everyone. I have seen videos claiming if you install a Bluetooth scanning app on your phone it will pick up the MAC address of "vaccinated" people who are in range. That would be easy enough to verify. There used to be a patent application on the Danish patent site from 2018, by a Rothschild no less, for an electromagnetic detection device able to detect the "virus". It has since been edited to scrub the earlier dates, and I kick myself for not saving a screenshot. Link below.
It could work in the same manner as an access key-card. The card or fob is powered electromagnetically from the reader, so there is no need for the electronics within the human to have its own power supply.
Secondly, to genetically alter the human. Compromise the immune system to make the human dependent on pharmaceuticals to continue living (customer for life).
Reduce the ability to procreate.
Kill off the weak and the infirm.
Someone, and I don't claim to know who, is at the core of ALL of this and knows full well exactly what the injections are intended to do, what they and the virus were engineered for. Absolutely evil genius.
I have done it. You change a few settings on your phone (developer settings). Now I am at home and there are no MAC addresses available. Yet whenever I am around people, there are loads.
I guess I'm still crazy and this another coincidence :)
This is really bizarre, if you really can detect these mac addresses. Aren't these the mobile phone addresses? I do pick those up. Do you have any idea what drives these addresses if they really are from inside a human body? I.e. what powers them?
I am not sure if i do or not. I tested this supposed phenomenon at work one time, with another colleague. We used our bluetooth on our iphones and walked past several unmanned laptops nearby, to see if the bluetooth picked up the mac address. We saw the laptop addresses. We also walked by several colleagues to see if a mac address would show up (no need to ask who was vaccinated, you know.) No other mac address showed up, besides the laptop's. I also tested it around my dwelling, and the neighbors' wifi showed up, but nothing unusual. I am not sure if this story is really true, although I read some compelling accounts of it. I would really like to know the veracity of it, as it is really a very curious thing. Keep me posted, I will do the same if I find out more.
Yes, the actual intent was to reduce fertility of women (mostly) by around 15-20% by editing several proteins known to cause infertility into their gonadal DNA. An adjuvant to up-regulate LINE1 was included in the cocktail, along with the mMRA for those additional mutant proteins. All the other deaths etc. were just collateral damage. Robert Malone wrote an excellent piece revealing a RAND Kissinger paper written in the 1970's that concluded that if global population exceeded 8 billion, it would destabilize the Western economies and that the DOD should act to prevent such. Guess how close to that we were by 2020? Sweden's live births are down around 13%, with around 70% jabbe compliance, based on analysis done by Substack writer "Boriquagato".
In terms of the physics, just try jumping rope in a vacuum. :-)
In terms of space travel and the vacuum, the scope here does not cover electromagnetic propulsion; things have not developed that far. It's also not the point of the article. Propulsion into and through space by carriages such as the apollo are simply not possible.
Thanks for your interesting contribution, William!!
If the vacuum was in a large chamber located on or close to earth, and a very strong athletic jumper wore a suitably lightweight and flexible pressure suit, then s/he could "jump rope" with no problem. See my other comment Zonder.
OK here goes: jumping rope is about whether a person's leg muscles can briefly release enough directed energy to overcome gravity for a moment, while they whip a rope around under themselves through the gap. Air friction only matters insofar as it smooths out the travel of the rope slightly. In a vacuum, you still would need to exoend the same energy to overcome gravity. Period. I feel bad for you bro.
Hey feller, regardless of whether you "feel bad" for me or whatever, your replies don't hold water. Stop posting if you cannot think beyond asteroid games. It serves no purpose to respond to you at your beck and call. Therefore I will leave your drivel here for now, as an example of complete brainlessness, but that's the last bit you get to post. Hugs.
Even NASA 'scientists' have admitted they cannot get past low level orbit. There is no way they can break through a barrier, which is supposedly robust enough to separate the earth's atmosphere, and the 'endless vacuum' of space.
When you ask how propulsion works in space, they simply say "Newton's third law". As if that settles the argument. But it does not. It is still a theory that this works in a vacuum.
As you say in the article, there is nothing for anything to exert force against. So there would be no opposing force. The thrust gas would just be let out into the endless vacuum.
So supposedly a rocket in space is not just sat there motionless. It is hurtling around space. So can anyone tell me how a little rocket can produce enough force to make itself move in some other direction? I.e. to overcome its the motion that 'space' is putting on it.
Quite a lot I think.
Also would require quite a lot of air for this combustion.
Hmmmm. Doesn't seem possible, or explainable to me.
We have never been to space, we don't have the tech now and we certainly didn't 60 years ago (lol).
P.s. it is without a doubt that there is serious engineering ongoing on that barrier. EMF exerted by installations such as HAARP is used. Prior to that, attempts were made with nuclear explosions (see China). Atmospheric anomalies occur due to these efforts. People still have not made that connection, and instead call it "global warming" or whatever other hooey they call it and "protest" against. Then there are the suborbital attempts at "flying in space" by the likes of (Sir) Richard Branson and his catapulted craft that screech through the upper layers of the atmosphere at speeds of 17000 mph. This lunacy causes tremendous shockwaves that result in destructive vortices, such as the Joplin tornado several years ago. And so it goes...
Exactly. That is why i ask the posters these questions, to get them to think and answer for themselves. If you think about angular momentum for instance (making turns in space, as one poster wrote), changing direction, where does this force come from, how is it exerted to cause the rocket to change direction? A rocket is just that, a rocket, it hurtles through space, without the capacity to break, change direction, or land softly. Let alone launch from its landing space again - where are the gas pumps, where is the oxygen, is the surface conducive to launches, etc. The "barrier" you write of, that's what I call the "roof of our house". If you take it down, or poke holes in it, you're in deep trouble.
Dear Henry, dear Paul, dear people,
To be honest, I am not particularly interested in weather the Earth is flat or round. For all intent and purpose it does not matter. Do you have your own Substacks about the topics you like to write about? If so, then we can continue this discussion on your Substacks. If not, could you please start up your own Substacks about the topics you like to write about, Flat Earth and such? I will gladly visit your Substacks and I am sure there are many other people who will visit as well. :-)
Zonder, because you don't seem to understand even the very simple Three Laws of Motion that Isaac Newton documented for humanity in the 1600's, you have disqualified yourself from sharing any other scientific opinions, even if you might be correct about pineal glands and so on. Please retract this article (delete it) because, like Flat Earth, it can be used to mock and dismiss those who are better equipped to question the real motives behind the DOD as the driving institution behind Warp Speed.
https://www.livescience.com/46558-laws-of-motion.html
Sorry, but I would not waste my time writing this if I didn't care about you as a person, a fellow child of God, and I'm sure you are a well meaning and thoughtful person.
Regards and love.
thank you - this was exactly my response as I read that area of Zonders article. Action/reaction. It gets exhausting reacting to the internet, doesn't it .......
Please expound. Snide comments alone don't hack it.
In your article, you make a serie of claims that space travel using rocket propulsion is impossible, therefore humans have never achieved it. THis is not true, and immediately raised my eyebrows. The internet is fulll of errors, often accidental but many are just based on suppositions or lack of rigour. Reaction from a thrust motor does not need to push against anything external to the motor in order to generate thrust..... the action of expelling a high speed exhaust of combusted products through a nozzle will allow the reaction to provide thrust.
Thanks for your response. Please do provide (1) the physics behind thrust propulsion in a vacuum. (2) the landing of a rocket propelled by a thrust motor, on a distant object in space, such as the moon. With gratitude.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsiolkovsky_rocket_equation#Derivation
https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/39146/how-can-thrust-be-generated-in-space-which-is-a-vacuum
https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/39146/how-can-thrust-be-generated-in-space-which-is-a-vacuum
Nonsense. Thrust does not work in a vacuum. Your links show the danger of too much schooling.
Well, he says it right? "by conservation of momentum." And then?
We make turns in space with jets.
The separation of masses, rocket and rocketfuel, should provide propulsion so far as I understand it.
Efficiency then in the burn, is to separate the rocket fuel at the highest possible velocity.
Such amounts of combustion requires huge amounts of air. Where do they store / get this from?
And then..? what about the rest of the trip, the landing, the return?
Wow and Wow! Thank you. Most rewarding read for me. I'm smiling but through
the tears. Sometimes I think I'm most radical grandma there is. And I'm not
kidding, I'm sorry close to be a flat earthed if not there already. All the space
endeavours look to me like a whole lot of CGIs. Lies, lies and more lies.
I often wonder myself... In any case, however, a flat earth seems a bit farfetched to me. This would mean that the universe has a topside and a bottomside, just like the flat earth allegedly has a topside and a bottomside, according to its design, in contrast to a sphere. How does one determine what is top and what is bottom on a flat earth - i.e. why is there something on only one side of the flat earth, why not on both sides of it? How does one determine what is top and what is bottom in an all-directional expanding space, such as is the universe as the container of the 'flat earth'?
Dear Zonder Reden, if you have some time "to waste" (that is, if you want to rack your brains on a topic that cannot be solved) you could read on this link some elaborate theses on why, in reality, the Earth is not a sphere (but it is certainly not flat either).
The Earth IS a sphere... but only FROM OUR point of view.
Here is exposed the thought of the philosopher P. D. Ouspensky, corroborated by some teachings and observations of his teacher G.
These expositions, regardless of whether they are correct or not, offer the possibility of opening ourselves to an "alternative" vision of the reality of the World. In other words, it is not very important to know if what is exposed here is true, or if it is only partially true, or if it is even completely wrong, what is interesting to understand is that certain questions can NEVER be answered reliably. There is only one way to understand these (and other) complex metaphysical issues: enter the Cosmic Consciousness and then the Supermind. I'll tell you right away - it is an almost impossible undertaking... (almost).
As a consequence no theoretical physicist, or mathematician will ever be able to get to the bottom of these questions simply using the human intellect. Furthermore, if you are interested you could also read the entire PDF, but keep in mind that it is only a very sophisticated form of occultism and magic. Some ideas exposed are certainly true, others only partially, and others still are false.
Hi Rafaele, very nice to hear from you! Yes, I am familiar with Gurdiev and Ouspensky. Great that you mention them again! Thank you for your contribution to the endeavors here, and may we meet again at the same place, does not have to be the same hour! :-)
These people find themselves in the rebirth (reincarnation) through "recurrence". This is the direct result of their work of magic. The knowledge here expounded comes both from Islamic Sufism and from some tradition connected with ancient Egypt. In the terms of this teaching the Cosmic Consciousness is represented by the connection with the "higher emotional centre" (of which the "Ānanda" of the Hindus is an aspect), while the Supermind (of which Sri Aurobindo speaks) is represented by the "higher intellectual centre".
https://pdf4pro.com/vendor/pdfjs-1.9.426/web/viewer-dark-blue.html?file=https%3A%2F%2Fpdf4pro.com%2Fcdn%2Fframmenti-di-un-insegnamento-sconosciuto-thule-30115b.pdf
"The earth is not a sphere, but a spiral that envelops the sun; and the sun is not a sphere, but a kind of spindle inside this spiral." (Page 239)
and also (read first) pages 234, 235, 236.
The believers in big bang, evolution etc cannot explain or even comprehend something from nothing, and a system not having a container.
So both sides are equal in this: it's not a failing of the 'flat earthers' to not be able to comprehend or explain the whole shape of the earth.
We just use our perception and intuition, as well as observing demonstrable, repeatable tests showing the earth is not a spinning ball.
But globe earthers cannot seriously say they are doing the same.
I do not know enough to personally comment on the "for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction" portion of your assertions. I do know space is not a vacuum in the strict sense and there is also quite a bit of electromagnetic waves going every which way. My personal take is we're looking at the issue exactly backwards because the world of physicality is an illusion fabricated / assembled by our awareness. This assemblage can be to some degree shared and sustained by those participating, thus creating the illusion of continuity. That said, I am in complete agreement with regards to the "vaccine", and I use the term loosely. I don't believe most people who are on to it are thinking big enough. I believe whoever came up with it knows exactly what it does in the body and it serves multiple purposes. One is to tag everyone. I have seen videos claiming if you install a Bluetooth scanning app on your phone it will pick up the MAC address of "vaccinated" people who are in range. That would be easy enough to verify. There used to be a patent application on the Danish patent site from 2018, by a Rothschild no less, for an electromagnetic detection device able to detect the "virus". It has since been edited to scrub the earlier dates, and I kick myself for not saving a screenshot. Link below.
https://nl.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?II=0&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=nl_NL&FT=D&date=20200903&CC=US&NR=2020279585A1&KC=A1
It could work in the same manner as an access key-card. The card or fob is powered electromagnetically from the reader, so there is no need for the electronics within the human to have its own power supply.
Secondly, to genetically alter the human. Compromise the immune system to make the human dependent on pharmaceuticals to continue living (customer for life).
Reduce the ability to procreate.
Kill off the weak and the infirm.
Someone, and I don't claim to know who, is at the core of ALL of this and knows full well exactly what the injections are intended to do, what they and the virus were engineered for. Absolutely evil genius.
"That would be easy enough to verify."
Have you verified it? What were your findings?
I have done it. You change a few settings on your phone (developer settings). Now I am at home and there are no MAC addresses available. Yet whenever I am around people, there are loads.
I guess I'm still crazy and this another coincidence :)
Ah, i see your reply just now.
This is really bizarre, if you really can detect these mac addresses. Aren't these the mobile phone addresses? I do pick those up. Do you have any idea what drives these addresses if they really are from inside a human body? I.e. what powers them?
No, mobile phone addresses display as the device name which is by default the brand and model. Or, a personalised one if changed by the user.
Sitting at home last night my phone showed 2 MAC addresses in this special new format. Guess how many neighbours I have? Two. Both jabbed.
Today I am at work and in the office with 12 people. Guess how many of those MAC addresses are showing? Twelve.
Happy to supply screenshots.
No. I do not personally own a sophisticated Bluetooth scanner, but they do exist. Do you own one?
I am not sure if i do or not. I tested this supposed phenomenon at work one time, with another colleague. We used our bluetooth on our iphones and walked past several unmanned laptops nearby, to see if the bluetooth picked up the mac address. We saw the laptop addresses. We also walked by several colleagues to see if a mac address would show up (no need to ask who was vaccinated, you know.) No other mac address showed up, besides the laptop's. I also tested it around my dwelling, and the neighbors' wifi showed up, but nothing unusual. I am not sure if this story is really true, although I read some compelling accounts of it. I would really like to know the veracity of it, as it is really a very curious thing. Keep me posted, I will do the same if I find out more.
You need to go into some special developer settings, or they won't show. There are guides online for how to do it on iOS and Android.
I'll check it. Have you been able to detect these mac addresses William Jeffreys writes of?
Yes, loads. Don't know if I can share a picture here, but I can take a few screenshots or vids of me in various places - busy and remote.
Will do. 👍
I came across this interesting account, plus video from his findings:
https://www.reddit.com/r/it/comments/zsror6/what_is_really_behind_the_phenomenon_of_emerging/?rdt=33357
Yes, the actual intent was to reduce fertility of women (mostly) by around 15-20% by editing several proteins known to cause infertility into their gonadal DNA. An adjuvant to up-regulate LINE1 was included in the cocktail, along with the mMRA for those additional mutant proteins. All the other deaths etc. were just collateral damage. Robert Malone wrote an excellent piece revealing a RAND Kissinger paper written in the 1970's that concluded that if global population exceeded 8 billion, it would destabilize the Western economies and that the DOD should act to prevent such. Guess how close to that we were by 2020? Sweden's live births are down around 13%, with around 70% jabbe compliance, based on analysis done by Substack writer "Boriquagato".
Seriously evil, indeed.
In terms of the physics, just try jumping rope in a vacuum. :-)
In terms of space travel and the vacuum, the scope here does not cover electromagnetic propulsion; things have not developed that far. It's also not the point of the article. Propulsion into and through space by carriages such as the apollo are simply not possible.
Thanks for your interesting contribution, William!!
If the vacuum was in a large chamber located on or close to earth, and a very strong athletic jumper wore a suitably lightweight and flexible pressure suit, then s/he could "jump rope" with no problem. See my other comment Zonder.
If. Now again without the "if."
OK here goes: jumping rope is about whether a person's leg muscles can briefly release enough directed energy to overcome gravity for a moment, while they whip a rope around under themselves through the gap. Air friction only matters insofar as it smooths out the travel of the rope slightly. In a vacuum, you still would need to exoend the same energy to overcome gravity. Period. I feel bad for you bro.
Hey feller, regardless of whether you "feel bad" for me or whatever, your replies don't hold water. Stop posting if you cannot think beyond asteroid games. It serves no purpose to respond to you at your beck and call. Therefore I will leave your drivel here for now, as an example of complete brainlessness, but that's the last bit you get to post. Hugs.