Was all the physics researched in the past fifty years faked?

  • 50 Replies
  • 12379 Views
Well, I just remembered that my grandfather is a nuclear physicist, and that led me to realize that all the physics discovered in the past fifty years must be faked. All the physicists, astronomers, and astrophysicists would have to have spent thier years doing nothing, getting huge sums of money to create bogus equations and theories.

Is that really possible? Stephen Hawking, Michio Kaku, for gods sake ALBERT EINSTEIN would all have to been tricked or bribed to keep thier mouths shut. So what is it? Really?

Re: Was all the physics researched in the past fifty years faked?
« Reply #1 on: June 01, 2010, 02:34:35 PM »
Well, I just remembered that my grandfather is a nuclear physicist, and that led me to realize that all the physics discovered in the past fifty years must be faked. All the physicists, astronomers, and astrophysicists would have to have spent thier years doing nothing, getting huge sums of money to create bogus equations and theories.

Is that really possible? Stephen Hawking, Michio Kaku, for gods sake ALBERT EINSTEIN would all have to been tricked or bribed to keep thier mouths shut. So what is it? Really?

The FES is perfectly willing to custom-tailor a Conspiracy to fit your individual for the low, flat cost of your intellect and self-respect.

Trolling makes me angry.

Re: Was all the physics researched in the past fifty years faked?
« Reply #2 on: June 01, 2010, 05:32:17 PM »
Aye.

Re: Was all the physics researched in the past fifty years faked?
« Reply #3 on: June 01, 2010, 09:39:25 PM »
The most ridiculous thing about this is that scientists are some of the most sincere knowledge-seekers in the world. Science used to be called natural philosophy back in the old days of Newton, and philosophy is the love of wisdom. Who wants to know nature's truths with more passion than the lovers of natural wisdom? To say that all scientists would somehow give it all up and keep their mouths shut to make a bit more money is nonsense. The conspiracy theory is, like a lot of conspiracy theories, astronomically unlikely. I myself wouldn't give into a conspiracy just to make more money; it would make science a sour disgrace of a field and I couldn't live with myself. I love the world for how it is and I place a very high value on truth, as other scientists do.

*

Catchpa

  • 1018
Re: Was all the physics researched in the past fifty years faked?
« Reply #4 on: June 01, 2010, 11:05:50 PM »
The previous scientists mistakenly thought the earth was round, and interpretated their resulsts that way. Einstein was wrong, as evidenced by their thread containing a bunch of links trying to shoot him down.
The conspiracy do train attack-birds

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 6105
Re: Was all the physics researched in the past fifty years faked?
« Reply #5 on: June 02, 2010, 04:48:41 AM »
Dr. D you haven't done much research lately, have you?

Here is the complete destruction of the Einstein's theory of relativity:

Nikola Tesla on the space-time continuum invented by Minkowski:

Tesla underlined that time was a mere man-made reference used for convenience and as such the idea of a 'curved space-time' was delusional, hence there was no basis for the Relativistic 'space-time' binomium concept.

Motion through space produces the 'illusion of time'.

He considered time as a mere man-made 'measure' of the rate at which events occur such as a distance travelled (in miles or kms) in a certain period of time, for a frame of reference. He considered the 'curving' of space to be absurd (putting it in gentle terms) saying that if a moving body curved space the 'equal and opposite' reaction of space on the body would 'straighten space back out'.

'... Supposing that the bodies act upon the surrounding space causing curving of the same, it appears to my simple mind that the curved spaces must react on the bodies, and producing the opposite effects, straightening out the curves. Since action and reaction are coexistent, it follows that the supposed curvature of space is entirely impossible - But even if it existed it would not explain the motions of the bodies as observed. Only the existence of a field of force can account for the motions of the bodies as observed, and its assumption dispenses with space curvature. All literature on this subject is futile and destined to oblivion. So are all attempts to explain the workings of the universe without recognizing the existence of the ether and the indispensable function it plays in the phenomena.'
'My second discovery was of a physical truth of the greatest importance. As I have searched the entire scientific records in more than a half dozen languages for a long time without finding the least anticipation, I consider myself the original discoverer of this truth, which can be expressed by the statement: There is no energy in matter other than that received from the environment.' Nikola Tesla

Tesla's aether is in fact a medium, 'a perfect fluid' that wets everything in which are immersed 'independent carriers'. It behaves as a solid to light (high frequency) and is transparent to matter, while it's effects can be felt through inertia. Tesla demonstrated how this aether could be 'polarized' and made 'rigid' through a particular high frequency alternator and single terminal coil (ex. 1892 lecture in London) and 2 metal plates which he 'suspended' in the air making the space between them rigid 'privately' on one another (ed. the tesla effect). In 1894, Tesla invented a special bulb (which was the ultimate result of his research in vacuum tubes; the unipolar 'targetless' bulb) which augmented this technology to create 'tubes of force' which could be used for motive power (what Tesla later cited as 'veritable ropes of air').

At the age of 81, Tesla challenged Einstein's theory of relativity, announcing that he was working on a dynamic theory of gravity that would do away with the calculation of space curvature.

During the succeeding two years of intense concentration I was fortunate enough to make two far-reaching discoveries. The first was a dynamic theory of gravity, which I have worked out in all details and hope to give to the world very soon. It explains the causes of this force and the motions of heavenly bodies under its influence so satisfactorily that it will put an end to idle speculations and false conceptions, as that of curved space. According to the relativists, space has a tendency to curvature owing to an inherent property or presence of celestial bodies. Granting a semblance of reality to this fantastic idea, it is still self-contradictory. Every action is accompanied by an equivalent reaction and the effects of the latter are directly opposite to those of the former. Supposing that the bodies act upon the surrounding space causing curvature of the same, it appears to my simple mind that the curved spaces must react on the bodies and, producing the opposite effects, straighten out the curves, Since action and reaction are coexistent, it follows that the supposed curvature of space is entirely impossible.

Speaking to his friends, Tesla often refuted some of Einstein's statements, especially those which were related with curvature of space. He considered that it breaks the law of action and opposite reaction: If curvature of space is formed due to strong gravitational fields, then it should become straight due to opposite reaction.

G.F. Riemann introduced (1854 - http://www.maths.tcd.ie/pub/HistMath/People/Riemann/Geom/WKCGeom.html) the abstract concept of n-dimensional geometry to facilitate the geometric representation of functions of a complex variable (especially logarithm branch cut). 'Such researches have become a necessity for many parts of mathematics, e.g., for the treatment of many-valued analytical functions.'

Never did he think to introduce TIME as a separate dimension or variable.

How was this done?

In contrast Riemann's original non-Euclidian geometry dealt solely with space and was therefore an amorphous continuum. Einstein and Minkowski made it metric.

Minkowski's four-dimensional space was transformed by using an imaginary (√-1.ct ) term in place of the real time ( t ). So the coordinates of Minkowski's Four-Dimensional Continuum, ( x1, x2, x3, x4 ) are all treated as space coordinates, but were in fact originally ( x1, x2, x3, t ) or rather ( x1, x2, x3,√-1.ct ), therefore the 4th space dimension x4 is in fact the imaginary √-1.ct substitute. This imaginary 4-dimensional union of time and space was termed by Minkowski as 'world'. Einstein called it 'Spacetime Continuum'. In fact, Minkowski never meant it to be used in curved space. His 4th dimension was meant to be Euclidean dimensions (straight), because it was well before the introduction of General Relativity. Einstein forcibly adopted it for 'curved' or 'None Euclidean' measurements without giving a word of explanations why he could do it. In fact, if there was an explanation Einstein would have given it. Yet, this was how 'Time' became 'Space' or '4th dimensional space' for mathematical purpose, which was then used in 'Spacetime Curvature', 'Ripples of Spacetime' and other applications in General Relativity, relativistic gravitation, which then went on to become Black Hole, etc., ...

'If Michelson-Morley is wrong, then relativity is wrong' (Einstein: The Life and Times, p. 106).

If the velocity of light is only a tiny bit dependent on the velocity of the light source, then my whole theory of Relativity and Gravitation is false.' {Quotation of A. Einstein from a letter to Erwin Finley-Freundlich: August 1913}


http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=537#p24341 (How the crucial Einstein shift experiments of 1919/1922 were FALSIFIED)


The extraordinary mistakes of A. Einstein:

http://web.archive.org/web/20070930082557/http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/dp5/relativ.htm

Many physicists who believe Einstein's theory of relativity to be flawed have not been able to get their papers accepted for publication in most scientific journals. Eminent scientists are intimidated and warned that they may spoil their career prospects, if they openly opposed Einstein's relativity. Distinguished British physicist Dr Louis Essen stated that physicists seem to abandon their critical faculties when considering relativity. He also remarked: Students are told that the theory must be accepted although they cannot expect to understand it. They are encouraged right at the beginning of their careers to forsake science in favor of dogma.'

William Cantrell: First, the alternative theories have never been given much attention nor taught at any university. Second, the establishmentarians have invested a lifetime of learning in maintaining the status quo, and they will act to protect their investment. . . . Third, Einstein's theory, being rather vaguely defined and self-contradictory by its own construction, allows some practitioners to display an aura of elitism and hubris in their ability to manipulate it. There is an exclusive quality to the theory like a country club, and that is part of its allure. Fourth, to admit a fundamental mistake in such a hyped-up theory would be an embarrassment, not only to the physics community at large, but also to the memory of a man whose portrait hangs in nearly every physics department around the world.

http://web.archive.org/web/20070930082557/http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/dp5/relativ.htm#rel3

When Lorentz first developed the idea of length contraction to explain the Michelson-Morley result, it struck many scientists as thoroughly arbitrary and ad hoc. Lorentz admitted that he had arrived at his equations by trial and error. It is noteworthy that no length contraction has ever been measured experimentally.

As for time dilation/clock slowing, it is known that the rate of radioactive decay of mesons slows down when they move at high speed, and the 1972 H'fele-Keating experiment found that an atomic clock transported eastward around the world lost 59 nanoseconds while a clock transported westward gained 273 nanoseconds. Obviously, such findings do not prove that time itself has dilated; it is more logical to suppose that motion affects the internal processes of particles and atoms. All physical devices used for time-keeping are subject to error when accelerated or decelerated, or moved through gravitational fields of different strengths. However, there are indications that the amount of clock retardation need not conform to Lorentz's ad hoc equation. Relativists claim that if one of two twin brothers journeys into outer space at enormously high speed and then returns to earth, he will have aged much less than his brother but this is no more than a speculative hypothesis.

If particles are accelerated to relativistic speeds, it becomes increasingly difficult to accelerate them further. Their exponentially increasing inertia as the speed of light is approached is usually attributed to the transformation of kinetic energy into inertial mass. But this interpretation is open to question. Relativists admit that the mass of the body concerned would appear to be constant in its own reference frame. It therefore makes more sense to regard the inertial mass of a system as purely a measure of its rest energy and therefore as independent of velocity. Instead of invoking relativistic mass increase, the experimental results can be explained on the theory that an accelerated massbound charge increasingly resists addition of kinetic energy that approaches the magnitude of its rest mass, and radiates thermal energy to keep its mass-energy constant.


EINSTEIN'S THEORY OF RELATIVITY: SCIENTIFIC THEORY OR ILLUSION?

http://users.net.yu/~mrp/contents.html

(Lorentz transformations) http://www.aquestionoftime.com/lorentz.html


UNAUTHORIZED BIOGRAPHY OF EINSTEIN:

http://www.reformation.org/einstein-unmasked.html


What is wrong with Relativity:

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/academ/whatswrongwithrelativity.html


1919 DATA FALSIFICATION:

http://einstein52.tripod.com/alberteinsteinprophetorplagiarist/id9.html

The Eclipse Data From 1919: The Greatest Hoax in 20th Century Science (PDF)

Moody -Eclipse_Data_From_1919Rev1.pdf
By Richard Moody Jr.



Einstein the plagiarist:

http://itis.volta.alessandria.it/episteme/ep6/ep6-bjerk-rec.htm


Did Einstein cheat?

http://www.wbabin.net/physics/tdm5.pdf


Was Einstein wrong about special relativity:

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/44738


EINSTEIN 1905 MISTAKES:

http://www.johnpeckscience.com/


TSR HOAX:

http://www.brojon.org/frontpage/EINSTEIN-WENT-WRONG.html


http://www.wbabin.net/valev/valev5.htm


STR/GTR DISASTER:

http://blog.hasslberger.com/2006/05/tweaking_einstein_unified_theo.html

http://www.physicsmyths.org.uk/relativity.htm


STR MISTAKES:

http://www.helmut-hille.de/units.html

http://www.wbabin.net/science/mueller.pdf

http://www.catholicintl.com/scienceissues/critique-dermott3.htm

http://web.archive.org/web/20071010075248/http://www.nexusmagazine.com/articles/einstein.html


H. Dingle critique of special relativity:

http://www.heretical.com/science/dingle1.html

http://www.suppressedscience.net/physics.html
(How anybody who dares to criticize the relativity theory is eliminated from the research labs/courses in universities)




?

Crustinator

  • 7813
  • Bamhammer horror!
Re: Was all the physics researched in the past fifty years faked?
« Reply #7 on: June 02, 2010, 06:43:59 AM »
Here is the complete destruction of the Einstein's theory of relativity:

How come you're never reprimanded for copypasting walls of text?

*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Administrator
  • 12095
Re: Was all the physics researched in the past fifty years faked?
« Reply #8 on: June 02, 2010, 09:03:39 AM »
Physicists didn't have to fake anything. They're just wrong.
"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord

Re: Was all the physics researched in the past fifty years faked?
« Reply #9 on: June 02, 2010, 09:15:24 AM »
Physicists didn't have to fake anything. They're just wrong.

What qualifies you to assert that with such absolute certainty?

*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Administrator
  • 12095
Re: Was all the physics researched in the past fifty years faked?
« Reply #10 on: June 02, 2010, 09:34:58 AM »
Since when do you need a qualification to state the truth?
"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord

*

Catchpa

  • 1018
Re: Was all the physics researched in the past fifty years faked?
« Reply #11 on: June 02, 2010, 10:04:13 AM »
Since many of these scientific subjects are much more complex than google searches.
The conspiracy do train attack-birds

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 39568
Re: Was all the physics researched in the past fifty years faked?
« Reply #12 on: June 02, 2010, 10:38:03 AM »
Since when do you need a qualification to state the truth?

Since it contradicts established doctrine.  That is not to say that established doctrine is always correct, it's just that you do need to defend your assertion.
« Last Edit: June 02, 2010, 10:39:41 AM by markjo »
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

Re: Was all the physics researched in the past fifty years faked?
« Reply #13 on: June 02, 2010, 01:27:14 PM »
Since when do you need a qualification to state the truth?

Since it contradicts established doctrine.  That is not to say that established doctrine is always correct, it's just that you do need to defend your assertion.

Who needs proof and logic when you have Zeteticism?

Trolling makes me angry.

*

sokarul

  • 17560
  • Discount Chemist
Re: Was all the physics researched in the past fifty years faked?
« Reply #14 on: June 02, 2010, 03:39:48 PM »
Since when do you need a qualification to state the truth?
Since when does you sitting in a chair disprove peoples life's work?
Sokarul

ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

Run Sandokhan run

Re: Was all the physics researched in the past fifty years faked?
« Reply #15 on: June 02, 2010, 03:44:03 PM »
He considered that it breaks the law of action and opposite reaction: If curvature of space is formed due to strong gravitational fields, then it should become straight due to opposite reaction.

So if I hang a coat on a hanger, and that coat is heavy enough to cause the hanger to bend, you're saying the concept of "opposite reaction" (do you mean the equal and opposite exchange of forces?) somehow means the hanger should straighten itself back out, even though I haven't yet removed the coat?

It is a property of mass (at least all that we've observed) to bend spacetime.  You seem to be arguing nothing more than "If spacetime bent, it would be straight.  It it nap time yet, nurse?  Can I have my tinfoil hat back now?"

*

Lorddave

  • 15734
Re: Was all the physics researched in the past fifty years faked?
« Reply #16 on: June 02, 2010, 07:15:41 PM »
I'm wondering why Levee is showing us images from an Electron Microscope that would, if I understand correctly, show the electron cloud and not the nucleus, since the electron cloud has an electric field that repels the electrons from the electron microsocope.

Also, aren't electron "orbits" probabilities of finding an electron there and not the actual, distinct location of an electron?

?

trig

  • 2240
Re: Was all the physics researched in the past fifty years faked?
« Reply #17 on: June 02, 2010, 07:20:10 PM »
Dr. D you haven't done much research lately, have you?

Here is the complete destruction of the Einstein's theory of relativity:

Nikola Tesla on the space-time continuum invented by Minkowski:

Tesla underlined that time was a mere man-made reference used for convenience and as such the idea of a 'curved space-time' was delusional, hence there was no basis for the Relativistic 'space-time' binomium concept.

Motion through space produces the 'illusion of time'.

He considered time as a mere man-made 'measure' of the rate at which events occur such as a distance travelled (in miles or kms) in a certain period of time, for a frame of reference. He considered the 'curving' of space to be absurd (putting it in gentle terms) saying that if a moving body curved space the 'equal and opposite' reaction of space on the body would 'straighten space back out'.

So, the opinion of Einstein is counteracted by the opinion of Nikola Tesla, and you, the world famous levee, are the one who knows which of these geniuses is right?

Einstein's ideas were not initially accepted by the scientific community, while Tesla's less bold ideas were. But in the end, when experimental confirmations of Relativity started to flow, Einstein's ideas became theories and the most far-away ideas of Tesla became the painful confirmation that he was losing his mind in his last years.

It is not levee who arbiters over scientific ideas, it is the experimental preponderance of evidence. Levee's compilation of all the bad things that anyone says about Einstein is a sick, pathetic argument of authority.
« Last Edit: June 02, 2010, 07:52:07 PM by trig »

*

sokarul

  • 17560
  • Discount Chemist
Re: Was all the physics researched in the past fifty years faked?
« Reply #18 on: June 02, 2010, 07:22:08 PM »

Also, aren't electron "orbits" probabilities of finding an electron there and not the actual, distinct location of an electron?
Correct, they are just electron clouds, par the uncertainty principle. 
Sokarul

ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

Run Sandokhan run

?

17 November

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 1298
Re: Was all the physics researched in the past fifty years faked?
« Reply #19 on: June 02, 2010, 10:38:29 PM »
Well, I just remembered that my grandfather is a nuclear physicist, and that led me to realize that all the physics discovered in the past fifty years must be faked.

After hearing that I believed the earth is flat, someone once remarked to me that they have an advantage over me in this since they had graduated from a school of physics. 

The truth is that he graduated from a house of liars (arrogant liars at that) which places him at a disadvantage.  Perhaps he gleaned a few crumbs of knowledge here and there, but at what price?  All of his understanding of science is perverted (and he paid and struggled to arrive at such a state).  Even a small amount of pure knowledge is infinitely preferable to that.

Quote from: sokarul

Quote from: Lord Wilmore
Since when do you need a qualification to state the truth?

Since when does you sitting in a chair disprove peoples life's work?

How do you know that?  More than likely, he was standing up when he disproved their life's work.

*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Administrator
  • 12095
Re: Was all the physics researched in the past fifty years faked?
« Reply #20 on: June 03, 2010, 03:47:03 AM »
Since when do you need a qualification to state the truth?

Since it contradicts established doctrine.  That is not to say that established doctrine is always correct, it's just that you do need to defend your assertion.


How does a qualification defend my assertion? I regularly defend my assertions. I just don't see why I need a qualification to do so.
"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord

*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Administrator
  • 12095
Re: Was all the physics researched in the past fifty years faked?
« Reply #21 on: June 03, 2010, 04:57:33 AM »
Please don't drag this off topic. There's a whole thread on the existence of nuclear weapons in the Science/Alt Science board.
« Last Edit: June 03, 2010, 05:02:20 AM by Lord Wilmore »
"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord

Re: Was all the physics researched in the past fifty years faked?
« Reply #22 on: June 03, 2010, 04:59:06 AM »

Also, aren't electron "orbits" probabilities of finding an electron there and not the actual, distinct location of an electron?

This is entirely true.

Also, Wilmore, you are an utterly pathetic hipocrite you just that an established doctrine is "wrong" and when someone tells you to prove it you go "No YOU prove YOUR doctrine is correct." Four year olds give better arguments than you.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 39568
Re: Was all the physics researched in the past fifty years faked?
« Reply #23 on: June 03, 2010, 05:08:44 AM »
Since when do you need a qualification to state the truth?

Since it contradicts established doctrine.  That is not to say that established doctrine is always correct, it's just that you do need to defend your assertion.

How does a qualification defend my assertion? I regularly defend my assertions. I just don't see why I need a qualification to do so.

It's always a heavy burden when you attempt to overthrow the established doctrine.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Administrator
  • 12095
Re: Was all the physics researched in the past fifty years faked?
« Reply #24 on: June 03, 2010, 05:10:20 AM »
Agreed, and it's my cross to bear. Once again though, I don't see why I need a qualification to bear it.
"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord

*

sokarul

  • 17560
  • Discount Chemist
Re: Was all the physics researched in the past fifty years faked?
« Reply #25 on: June 03, 2010, 05:31:58 AM »
Agreed, and it's my cross to bear. Once again though, I don't see why I need a qualification to bear it.
Because you sit in a chair while scientists work.  You are going to need a little more than your opinion to discredit physics.
Sokarul

ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

Run Sandokhan run

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36114
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Was all the physics researched in the past fifty years faked?
« Reply #26 on: June 03, 2010, 06:06:52 AM »
The truth is that he graduated from a house of liars (arrogant liars at that) which places him at a disadvantage.

It's one thing to claim that you don't agree with the views of others; it's quite another to call them liars because they disagree with you, especially when you accuse them of the arrogance of which you are just as guilty, in claiming to know the truth.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

Re: Was all the physics researched in the past fifty years faked?
« Reply #27 on: June 03, 2010, 07:12:41 AM »
The truth is that he graduated from a house of liars (arrogant liars at that) which places him at a disadvantage.

It's one thing to claim that you don't agree with the views of others; it's quite another to call them liars because they disagree with you, especially when you accuse them of the arrogance of which you are just as guilty, in claiming to know the truth.

Moment of respect.

...then I read some of your other posts.  :(

Trolling makes me angry.

?

Crustinator

  • 7813
  • Bamhammer horror!
Re: Was all the physics researched in the past fifty years faked?
« Reply #28 on: June 03, 2010, 07:17:43 AM »
I regularly defend my assertions. I just don't see why I need a qualification to do so.

It would help us believe that you knew what you're talking about. You don't need a qualification (on paper) just the ability to qualify what you're posting. Plox.

*

Sliver

  • 557
Re: Was all the physics researched in the past fifty years faked?
« Reply #29 on: June 03, 2010, 07:21:48 AM »
Please don't drag this off topic. There's a whole thread on the existence of nuclear weapons in the Science/Alt Science board.
Talk to levee, he brought it up.