You have been ignored for common interest of mankind.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/13.7/2011/06/07/137028191/binding-the-universe-s-other-half-anti-matter-trapped-for-15-minutesYep, we contained anti-matter for 16 minutes. At this rate we'll be powering our next wave of weapons with anti-matter.
Quote from: Lorddave on June 07, 2011, 06:21:20 PMhttp://www.npr.org/blogs/13.7/2011/06/07/137028191/binding-the-universe-s-other-half-anti-matter-trapped-for-15-minutesYep, we contained anti-matter for 16 minutes. At this rate we'll be powering our next wave of weapons with anti-matter.This article is pretty lame. It doesn't say how or why they did it. How much did they spend on it. Is there proof other than the picture here. If you read ENaG, why don't you believe Rowbotham. He made some claims and at least described the experiments.
This article is pretty lame. It doesn't say how or why they did it. How much did they spend on it. Is there proof other than the picture here. If you read ENaG, why don't you believe Rowbotham. He made some claims and at least described the experiments.
Quote from: hoppy on June 07, 2011, 06:35:44 PMThis article is pretty lame. It doesn't say how or why they did it. How much did they spend on it. Is there proof other than the picture here. If you read ENaG, why don't you believe Rowbotham. He made some claims and at least described the experiments.He's trying to trick you into believing in Anti-matter.
Quote from: Vindictus on June 07, 2011, 07:28:53 PMQuote from: hoppy on June 07, 2011, 06:35:44 PMThis article is pretty lame. It doesn't say how or why they did it. How much did they spend on it. Is there proof other than the picture here. If you read ENaG, why don't you believe Rowbotham. He made some claims and at least described the experiments.He's trying to trick you into believing in Anti-matter. I don't think so.
Quote from: hoppy on June 07, 2011, 08:28:53 PMQuote from: Vindictus on June 07, 2011, 07:28:53 PMQuote from: hoppy on June 07, 2011, 06:35:44 PMThis article is pretty lame. It doesn't say how or why they did it. How much did they spend on it. Is there proof other than the picture here. If you read ENaG, why don't you believe Rowbotham. He made some claims and at least described the experiments.He's trying to trick you into believing in Anti-matter.NASA has already tricked you. You were probably the easiest victim. I don't think so.Rowbotham is trying to trick you into believing nonsense.
Quote from: Vindictus on June 07, 2011, 07:28:53 PMQuote from: hoppy on June 07, 2011, 06:35:44 PMThis article is pretty lame. It doesn't say how or why they did it. How much did they spend on it. Is there proof other than the picture here. If you read ENaG, why don't you believe Rowbotham. He made some claims and at least described the experiments.He's trying to trick you into believing in Anti-matter.NASA has already tricked you. You were probably the easiest victim. I don't think so.
Quote from: sillyrob on June 07, 2011, 08:34:44 PMQuote from: hoppy on June 07, 2011, 08:28:53 PMQuote from: Vindictus on June 07, 2011, 07:28:53 PMQuote from: hoppy on June 07, 2011, 06:35:44 PMThis article is pretty lame. It doesn't say how or why they did it. How much did they spend on it. Is there proof other than the picture here. If you read ENaG, why don't you believe Rowbotham. He made some claims and at least described the experiments.He's trying to trick you into believing in Anti-matter.NASA has already tricked you. You were probably the easiest victim. I don't think so.Rowbotham is trying to trick you into believing nonsense.
^ They've got previous.http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/85421-nasa-moneky-experiment-facing-animal-cruelty-charges
Our existentialist, relativist, nihilist, determinist, fascist, eugenicist moderator hath returned.
objectively good
Also, Chris is hot.