Frame of reference experiments for Sceptimatic

  • 387 Replies
  • 37447 Views
*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42013
Re: Frame of reference experiments for Sceptimatic
« Reply #360 on: March 19, 2013, 06:42:04 AM »
But people like Sceptic are so very special.... town cntres are full of them shouting at passers by every day. They all know the secrets of the universe, if olny someone would listen to them.
It's not so much that he knows the right answers.  He just knows that everyone else's answers are wrong.
#" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">Weird Al Yankovic - Everything You Know Is Wrong
« Last Edit: March 19, 2013, 06:43:45 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.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28338
Re: Frame of reference experiments for Sceptimatic
« Reply #361 on: March 19, 2013, 07:08:14 AM »
This is just absolutely stupid now... Lots of people leave universities qualified enough to under the science you like to shit on... People can even do it after high school...
This is where you are misunderstanding me though. I have every respect for those who go to universities to learn whatever they choose to learn and I'm well aware of the effort they put into gaining the required qualifications of what they choose to learn, so it's pointless you making out I'm trying to crap on peoples choices, because I'm not.

If a person goes to university to study English and the arts etc and their goal is to become a teacher, then great, they earned that right to do that if their grades are what's required.
The same goes for everything else a university offers.

Now if someone goes to university to learn astro physics, they are learning about what's told to them about the universe from what they can view themselves , plus all the equations that are put out to show this, that and the other and they can come out of university, qualified to go into a filed that requires that particular qualification and even end up teaching it to others as time goes on.

A nuclear physicist course can deal with theories on atoms and whatever they teach and what they teach you is perfectly feasible to you because it all appears to fit, in theory, yet in proof, you would need to do the experiments to view the end product of what you have learned, which would mean seeing fissioning in action of lumps of metal, basically.
Of course, as in astro physics and nuclear and many other theory driven subjects, you get marked on what they put into your "memory" and become qualified on how you read that from your "memory."

All of what you learn has an impact on your life but all of what you learn doesn't mean that it's all the actual reality of life, as some of it relies on theory, which in the science world is as good as fact but it isn't actually fact, if you get my meaning.

So how can a system work in teaching people how something works, like E=MC2, relativity, general and special, the big bang, dinosaurs and all the rest of it.
Well first of all, it's about who can tell the best story and not only tell that story but actually put in the proofs to make that story a believable story so people see it as non-fiction rather than a fiction.

A tramp off the street can't walk into a university , stand in front of you and expect you to believe in something he's made up, even if it appears to be sound, as he would be rejected as just some bozo peddling his thoughts, yet take him away and cut his hair, shave him and bathe him and stick a white coat on him with Dr blah blah PHD, then send him to another class to peddle the very same thing he done as the tramp and it all makes sense to the class, because they immediately hang on to and respect the man and his teachings.

Most of lifes teachings do actually have an end product but there's a hell of a lot of end product which is simply recycled back into each generations minds by the very same people who believe they learned from the master and who are now the class of the next generations master and so on and so on.

That's life and what you learn with your theories that you believe are fact, you will happily teach those under you in later years after you qualify to do so. You are well paid, you believe you are making a difference and everyone is happy.
So as you can see, whether some of what we learn is maybe fabricated, it still plays a part in life, it just may not be exactly the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.


*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42013
Re: Frame of reference experiments for Sceptimatic
« Reply #362 on: March 19, 2013, 07:27:31 AM »
A nuclear physicist course can deal with theories on atoms and whatever they teach and what they teach you is perfectly feasible to you because it all appears to fit, in theory, yet in proof, you would need to do the experiments to view the end product of what you have learned, which would mean seeing fissioning in action of lumps of metal, basically.

What makes you think that this isn't what's happening already? 
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.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28338
Re: Frame of reference experiments for Sceptimatic
« Reply #363 on: March 19, 2013, 07:43:14 AM »
A nuclear physicist course can deal with theories on atoms and whatever they teach and what they teach you is perfectly feasible to you because it all appears to fit, in theory, yet in proof, you would need to do the experiments to view the end product of what you have learned, which would mean seeing fissioning in action of lumps of metal, basically.

What makes you think that this isn't what's happening already?
Maybe it is.
I just don't think it's all what it's cracked up to be.

Re: Frame of reference experiments for Sceptimatic
« Reply #364 on: March 19, 2013, 07:47:24 AM »
A nuclear physicist course can deal with theories on atoms and whatever they teach and what they teach you is perfectly feasible to you because it all appears to fit, in theory, yet in proof, you would need to do the experiments to view the end product of what you have learned, which would mean seeing fissioning in action of lumps of metal, basically.

What makes you think that this isn't what's happening already?
Maybe it is.
I just don't think it's all what it's cracked up to be.
What, higher education?
I'd like to agree with you but then we'd both be wrong!

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28338
Re: Frame of reference experiments for Sceptimatic
« Reply #365 on: March 19, 2013, 07:49:06 AM »
A nuclear physicist course can deal with theories on atoms and whatever they teach and what they teach you is perfectly feasible to you because it all appears to fit, in theory, yet in proof, you would need to do the experiments to view the end product of what you have learned, which would mean seeing fissioning in action of lumps of metal, basically.

What makes you think that this isn't what's happening already?
Maybe it is.
I just don't think it's all what it's cracked up to be.
What, higher education?
Nope. I'm talking as in certain education that involves theories passed over as facts.

Re: Frame of reference experiments for Sceptimatic
« Reply #366 on: March 19, 2013, 07:53:10 AM »
A nuclear physicist course can deal with theories on atoms and whatever they teach and what they teach you is perfectly feasible to you because it all appears to fit, in theory, yet in proof, you would need to do the experiments to view the end product of what you have learned, which would mean seeing fissioning in action of lumps of metal, basically.

What makes you think that this isn't what's happening already?
Maybe it is.
I just don't think it's all what it's cracked up to be.
What, higher education?
Nope. I'm talking as in certain education that involves theories passed over as facts.
Have you actually studied at university?
I'd like to agree with you but then we'd both be wrong!

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42013
Re: Frame of reference experiments for Sceptimatic
« Reply #367 on: March 19, 2013, 07:53:19 AM »
A nuclear physicist course can deal with theories on atoms and whatever they teach and what they teach you is perfectly feasible to you because it all appears to fit, in theory, yet in proof, you would need to do the experiments to view the end product of what you have learned, which would mean seeing fissioning in action of lumps of metal, basically.

What makes you think that this isn't what's happening already?
Maybe it is.
I just don't think it's all what it's cracked up to be.
What, higher education?
Nope. I'm talking as in certain education that involves theories passed over as facts.
You do realize that some universities do have nuclear reactors that they use to test those theories, don't you?  In fact, pretty much the whole point of science is to make theories and then test them.
« Last Edit: March 19, 2013, 07:55:16 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.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28338
Re: Frame of reference experiments for Sceptimatic
« Reply #368 on: March 19, 2013, 07:55:22 AM »
A nuclear physicist course can deal with theories on atoms and whatever they teach and what they teach you is perfectly feasible to you because it all appears to fit, in theory, yet in proof, you would need to do the experiments to view the end product of what you have learned, which would mean seeing fissioning in action of lumps of metal, basically.


What makes you think that this isn't what's happening already?
Maybe it is.
I just don't think it's all what it's cracked up to be.
What, higher education?
Nope. I'm talking as in certain education that involves theories passed over as facts.
Have you actually studied at university?
I don't think I need to answer that to be fair. I think everyone has already made their mind up on that one don't you.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28338
Re: Frame of reference experiments for Sceptimatic
« Reply #369 on: March 19, 2013, 07:56:01 AM »
A nuclear physicist course can deal with theories on atoms and whatever they teach and what they teach you is perfectly feasible to you because it all appears to fit, in theory, yet in proof, you would need to do the experiments to view the end product of what you have learned, which would mean seeing fissioning in action of lumps of metal, basically.

What makes you think that this isn't what's happening already?
Maybe it is.
I just don't think it's all what it's cracked up to be.
What, higher education?
Nope. I'm talking as in certain education that involves theories passed over as facts.
You do realize that some universities do have nuclear reactors that they use to test those theories, don't you?  In fact, pretty much the whole point of science is to make theories and then test them.
No. Can you point me to one that fissions uranium?

*

Rama Set

  • 6877
  • I am also an engineer
Re: Frame of reference experiments for Sceptimatic
« Reply #370 on: March 19, 2013, 08:00:38 AM »
A nuclear physicist course can deal with theories on atoms and whatever they teach and what they teach you is perfectly feasible to you because it all appears to fit, in theory, yet in proof, you would need to do the experiments to view the end product of what you have learned, which would mean seeing fissioning in action of lumps of metal, basically.

What makes you think that this isn't what's happening already?
Maybe it is.
I just don't think it's all what it's cracked up to be.
What, higher education?
Nope. I'm talking as in certain education that involves theories passed over as facts.
You do realize that some universities do have nuclear reactors that they use to test those theories, don't you?  In fact, pretty much the whole point of science is to make theories and then test them.
No. Can you point me to one that fissions uranium?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMaster_Nuclear_Reactor
Aether is the  characteristic of action or inaction of charged  & noncharged particals.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42013
Re: Frame of reference experiments for Sceptimatic
« Reply #371 on: March 19, 2013, 08:03:52 AM »
A nuclear physicist course can deal with theories on atoms and whatever they teach and what they teach you is perfectly feasible to you because it all appears to fit, in theory, yet in proof, you would need to do the experiments to view the end product of what you have learned, which would mean seeing fissioning in action of lumps of metal, basically.

What makes you think that this isn't what's happening already?
Maybe it is.
I just don't think it's all what it's cracked up to be.
What, higher education?
Nope. I'm talking as in certain education that involves theories passed over as facts.
You do realize that some universities do have nuclear reactors that they use to test those theories, don't you?  In fact, pretty much the whole point of science is to make theories and then test them.
No. Can you point me to one that fissions uranium?
Well, there's one at the University of Wisconsin:
http://abcnews.go.com/Primetime/LooseNukes/story?id=988736
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/15/us/uranium-reactors-on-campus-raise-security-concerns.html
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.

*

mathsman

  • 487
  • one of the lads
Re: Frame of reference experiments for Sceptimatic
« Reply #372 on: March 19, 2013, 08:04:26 AM »
No. Can you point me to one that fissions uranium?

Here's a link to the university's website itself.

http://mnr.mcmaster.ca/overview/more-about-mnr.html

Check out the third line down:

'The McMaster Nuclear Reactor is a medium flux nuclear fission reactor with a light water moderator and an open pool design. '
« Last Edit: March 19, 2013, 08:06:21 AM by mathsman »

Re: Frame of reference experiments for Sceptimatic
« Reply #373 on: March 19, 2013, 08:06:16 AM »
A nuclear physicist course can deal with theories on atoms and whatever they teach and what they teach you is perfectly feasible to you because it all appears to fit, in theory, yet in proof, you would need to do the experiments to view the end product of what you have learned, which would mean seeing fissioning in action of lumps of metal, basically.


What makes you think that this isn't what's happening already?
Maybe it is.
I just don't think it's all what it's cracked up to be.
What, higher education?
Nope. I'm talking as in certain education that involves theories passed over as facts.
Have you actually studied at university?
I don't think I need to answer that to be fair. I think everyone has already made their mind up on that one don't you.
You do come across as someone who doesn't understand how learning at university works, but I wanted to give you the benefit of the doubt.

This is really simplified but basically you can learn by 2 ways at university.
1: Memorize what the lecturer tells you
2: Research what's going on and why something is the way it is in order to get an understanding of it beyond simply memorizing facts and figures.

Different courses lend themselves more to 1 way over the other, ironically things like physics require you to do far more of option 2.
I'd like to agree with you but then we'd both be wrong!

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28338
Re: Frame of reference experiments for Sceptimatic
« Reply #374 on: March 19, 2013, 08:15:47 AM »
A nuclear physicist course can deal with theories on atoms and whatever they teach and what they teach you is perfectly feasible to you because it all appears to fit, in theory, yet in proof, you would need to do the experiments to view the end product of what you have learned, which would mean seeing fissioning in action of lumps of metal, basically.

What makes you think that this isn't what's happening already?
Maybe it is.
I just don't think it's all what it's cracked up to be.
What, higher education?
Nope. I'm talking as in certain education that involves theories passed over as facts.
You do realize that some universities do have nuclear reactors that they use to test those theories, don't you?  In fact, pretty much the whole point of science is to make theories and then test them.
No. Can you point me to one that fissions uranium?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMaster_Nuclear_Reactor
Can you point me to one that fissions uranium?

*

Rama Set

  • 6877
  • I am also an engineer
Re: Frame of reference experiments for Sceptimatic
« Reply #375 on: March 19, 2013, 08:17:59 AM »
A nuclear physicist course can deal with theories on atoms and whatever they teach and what they teach you is perfectly feasible to you because it all appears to fit, in theory, yet in proof, you would need to do the experiments to view the end product of what you have learned, which would mean seeing fissioning in action of lumps of metal, basically.

What makes you think that this isn't what's happening already?
Maybe it is.
I just don't think it's all what it's cracked up to be.
What, higher education?
Nope. I'm talking as in certain education that involves theories passed over as facts.
You do realize that some universities do have nuclear reactors that they use to test those theories, don't you?  In fact, pretty much the whole point of science is to make theories and then test them.
No. Can you point me to one that fissions uranium?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMaster_Nuclear_Reactor
Can you point me to one that fissions uranium?

I am not sure why you are being obtuse.  This reactor fissions uranium.
Aether is the  characteristic of action or inaction of charged  & noncharged particals.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28338
Re: Frame of reference experiments for Sceptimatic
« Reply #376 on: March 19, 2013, 08:20:27 AM »
A nuclear physicist course can deal with theories on atoms and whatever they teach and what they teach you is perfectly feasible to you because it all appears to fit, in theory, yet in proof, you would need to do the experiments to view the end product of what you have learned, which would mean seeing fissioning in action of lumps of metal, basically.

What makes you think that this isn't what's happening already?
Maybe it is.
I just don't think it's all what it's cracked up to be.
What, higher education?
Nope. I'm talking as in certain education that involves theories passed over as facts.
You do realize that some universities do have nuclear reactors that they use to test those theories, don't you?  In fact, pretty much the whole point of science is to make theories and then test them.
No. Can you point me to one that fissions uranium?
Well, there's one at the University of Wisconsin:
http://abcnews.go.com/Primetime/LooseNukes/story?id=988736
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/15/us/uranium-reactors-on-campus-raise-security-concerns.html
Ok, this one appears to be uranium. No security or nothing for this highly poisonous so called metal.
So what are they really?

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28338
Re: Frame of reference experiments for Sceptimatic
« Reply #377 on: March 19, 2013, 08:21:25 AM »
A nuclear physicist course can deal with theories on atoms and whatever they teach and what they teach you is perfectly feasible to you because it all appears to fit, in theory, yet in proof, you would need to do the experiments to view the end product of what you have learned, which would mean seeing fissioning in action of lumps of metal, basically.

What makes you think that this isn't what's happening already?
Maybe it is.
I just don't think it's all what it's cracked up to be.
What, higher education?
Nope. I'm talking as in certain education that involves theories passed over as facts.
You do realize that some universities do have nuclear reactors that they use to test those theories, don't you?  In fact, pretty much the whole point of science is to make theories and then test them.
No. Can you point me to one that fissions uranium?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMaster_Nuclear_Reactor
Can you point me to one that fissions uranium?

I am not sure why you are being obtuse.  This reactor fissions uranium.
I'm sure they do. In fantasy world.

*

Rama Set

  • 6877
  • I am also an engineer
Re: Frame of reference experiments for Sceptimatic
« Reply #378 on: March 19, 2013, 08:26:13 AM »
A nuclear physicist course can deal with theories on atoms and whatever they teach and what they teach you is perfectly feasible to you because it all appears to fit, in theory, yet in proof, you would need to do the experiments to view the end product of what you have learned, which would mean seeing fissioning in action of lumps of metal, basically.

What makes you think that this isn't what's happening already?
Maybe it is.
I just don't think it's all what it's cracked up to be.
What, higher education?
Nope. I'm talking as in certain education that involves theories passed over as facts.
You do realize that some universities do have nuclear reactors that they use to test those theories, don't you?  In fact, pretty much the whole point of science is to make theories and then test them.
No. Can you point me to one that fissions uranium?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMaster_Nuclear_Reactor
Can you point me to one that fissions uranium?

I am not sure why you are being obtuse.  This reactor fissions uranium.
I'm sure they do. In fantasy world.

If you already knew the answer, why did you ask?  If you ever wonder why people make personal attacks on you, it is pointless time wasting exercises like this.  You should really do the adult and courageous thing and go out and discover for yourself what is going on with these reactors.  I am sure everyone would love a detailed and documented report and not your unsubstantiated thought experiements that often lack the necessary knowledge base to be take seriously.
Aether is the  characteristic of action or inaction of charged  & noncharged particals.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28338
Re: Frame of reference experiments for Sceptimatic
« Reply #379 on: March 19, 2013, 08:33:24 AM »
A nuclear physicist course can deal with theories on atoms and whatever they teach and what they teach you is perfectly feasible to you because it all appears to fit, in theory, yet in proof, you would need to do the experiments to view the end product of what you have learned, which would mean seeing fissioning in action of lumps of metal, basically.

What makes you think that this isn't what's happening already?
Maybe it is.
I just don't think it's all what it's cracked up to be.
What, higher education?
Nope. I'm talking as in certain education that involves theories passed over as facts.
You do realize that some universities do have nuclear reactors that they use to test those theories, don't you?  In fact, pretty much the whole point of science is to make theories and then test them.
No. Can you point me to one that fissions uranium?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMaster_Nuclear_Reactor
Can you point me to one that fissions uranium?

I am not sure why you are being obtuse.  This reactor fissions uranium.
I'm sure they do. In fantasy world.

If you already knew the answer, why did you ask?  If you ever wonder why people make personal attacks on you, it is pointless time wasting exercises like this.  You should really do the adult and courageous thing and go out and discover for yourself what is going on with these reactors.  I am sure everyone would love a detailed and documented report and not your unsubstantiated thought experiements that often lack the necessary knowledge base to be take seriously.
I don't get taken seriously Rama and the personal attacks will always come. It's down to frustration that's all.
I will never be taken seriously by most, because I'm a sceptic and a conspiracy theorist that knows nothing about anything in most peoples eyes.

I asked for the university links as a little devilish proof of the fantasy about uranium fissioning to be honest, so I apologise for the duping.
I just wanted to show that uranium can be tossed about campus like confetti and doesn't need security and can be treated basically as if the reactor wasn't actually potentially harmful, which they aren't because they are not what they are portrayed to be. In my opinion.

*

Rama Set

  • 6877
  • I am also an engineer
Re: Frame of reference experiments for Sceptimatic
« Reply #380 on: March 19, 2013, 08:37:15 AM »
A nuclear physicist course can deal with theories on atoms and whatever they teach and what they teach you is perfectly feasible to you because it all appears to fit, in theory, yet in proof, you would need to do the experiments to view the end product of what you have learned, which would mean seeing fissioning in action of lumps of metal, basically.

What makes you think that this isn't what's happening already?
Maybe it is.
I just don't think it's all what it's cracked up to be.
What, higher education?
Nope. I'm talking as in certain education that involves theories passed over as facts.
You do realize that some universities do have nuclear reactors that they use to test those theories, don't you?  In fact, pretty much the whole point of science is to make theories and then test them.
No. Can you point me to one that fissions uranium?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMaster_Nuclear_Reactor
Can you point me to one that fissions uranium?

I am not sure why you are being obtuse.  This reactor fissions uranium.
I'm sure they do. In fantasy world.

If you already knew the answer, why did you ask?  If you ever wonder why people make personal attacks on you, it is pointless time wasting exercises like this.  You should really do the adult and courageous thing and go out and discover for yourself what is going on with these reactors.  I am sure everyone would love a detailed and documented report and not your unsubstantiated thought experiements that often lack the necessary knowledge base to be take seriously.
I don't get taken seriously Rama and the personal attacks will always come. It's down to frustration that's all.
I will never be taken seriously by most, because I'm a sceptic and a conspiracy theorist that knows nothing about anything in most peoples eyes.

I asked for the university links as a little devilish proof of the fantasy about uranium fissioning to be honest, so I apologise for the duping.
I just wanted to show that uranium can be tossed about campus like confetti and doesn't need security and can be treated basically as if the reactor wasn't actually potentially harmful, which they aren't because they are not what they are portrayed to be. In my opinion.

Just because there is "no security" does not mean it is not behind locked doors with few people having access.  It definitely does not mean it gets "thrown around like confetti".  Men with guns are not the only way to make something safe.  There is also very likely laws that prohibity the amount and enrichement level of uranium on a university campus that reduce the need for security.
Aether is the  characteristic of action or inaction of charged  & noncharged particals.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28338
Re: Frame of reference experiments for Sceptimatic
« Reply #381 on: March 19, 2013, 08:58:36 AM »
A nuclear physicist course can deal with theories on atoms and whatever they teach and what they teach you is perfectly feasible to you because it all appears to fit, in theory, yet in proof, you would need to do the experiments to view the end product of what you have learned, which would mean seeing fissioning in action of lumps of metal, basically.

What makes you think that this isn't what's happening already?
Maybe it is.
I just don't think it's all what it's cracked up to be.
What, higher education?
Nope. I'm talking as in certain education that involves theories passed over as facts.
You do realize that some universities do have nuclear reactors that they use to test those theories, don't you?  In fact, pretty much the whole point of science is to make theories and then test them.
No. Can you point me to one that fissions uranium?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMaster_Nuclear_Reactor
Can you point me to one that fissions uranium?

I am not sure why you are being obtuse.  This reactor fissions uranium.
I'm sure they do. In fantasy world.

If you already knew the answer, why did you ask?  If you ever wonder why people make personal attacks on you, it is pointless time wasting exercises like this.  You should really do the adult and courageous thing and go out and discover for yourself what is going on with these reactors.  I am sure everyone would love a detailed and documented report and not your unsubstantiated thought experiements that often lack the necessary knowledge base to be take seriously.
I don't get taken seriously Rama and the personal attacks will always come. It's down to frustration that's all.
I will never be taken seriously by most, because I'm a sceptic and a conspiracy theorist that knows nothing about anything in most peoples eyes.

I asked for the university links as a little devilish proof of the fantasy about uranium fissioning to be honest, so I apologise for the duping.
I just wanted to show that uranium can be tossed about campus like confetti and doesn't need security and can be treated basically as if the reactor wasn't actually potentially harmful, which they aren't because they are not what they are portrayed to be. In my opinion.

Just because there is "no security" does not mean it is not behind locked doors with few people having access.  It definitely does not mean it gets "thrown around like confetti".  Men with guns are not the only way to make something safe.  There is also very likely laws that prohibity the amount and enrichement level of uranium on a university campus that reduce the need for security.
Well of course. I mean I suppose they will have cloaking tactics employed, whereas, if terrorists break in, the uranium immediately shuts itself down and takes the shape of a incubated chickens egg or something to fool them.

Re: Frame of reference experiments for Sceptimatic
« Reply #382 on: March 19, 2013, 01:40:59 PM »
It would probably be an insulated egg, given the amount of radiation involved.
The video demonstrates that we can not fully trust our senses.

Re: Frame of reference experiments for Sceptimatic
« Reply #383 on: March 19, 2013, 07:46:57 PM »
Picture for Sceptimatic

Gladys Roy and Ivan Unger play tennis on the wing of a biplane in flight, 1925. Photograph: Museum Syndicate.

http://blogs.airspacemag.com/daily-planet/2013/01/tennis-anyone/
Quote from: Heiwa
You are ignoring this user. Show me the post.

Re: Frame of reference experiments for Sceptimatic
« Reply #384 on: March 20, 2013, 12:25:19 AM »
Picture for Sceptimatic

Gladys Roy and Ivan Unger play tennis on the wing of a biplane in flight, 1925. Photograph: Museum Syndicate.

http://blogs.airspacemag.com/daily-planet/2013/01/tennis-anyone/

And that photo must be geniune, because in the background you can clearly see that the earth is flat  :D
The video demonstrates that we can not fully trust our senses.

Re: Frame of reference experiments for Sceptimatic
« Reply #385 on: March 20, 2013, 01:14:55 AM »
Picture for Sceptimatic

Gladys Roy and Ivan Unger play tennis on the wing of a biplane in flight, 1925. Photograph: Museum Syndicate.

http://blogs.airspacemag.com/daily-planet/2013/01/tennis-anyone/

And that photo must be geniune, because in the background you can clearly see that the earth is flat  :D
How is wimbledon still bigger than this???

*

mathsman

  • 487
  • one of the lads
Re: Frame of reference experiments for Sceptimatic
« Reply #386 on: March 20, 2013, 01:47:54 AM »
Picture for Sceptimatic

Gladys Roy and Ivan Unger play tennis on the wing of a biplane in flight, 1925. Photograph: Museum Syndicate.

http://blogs.airspacemag.com/daily-planet/2013/01/tennis-anyone/

And that photo must be geniune, because in the background you can clearly see that the earth is flat  :D
How is wimbledon still bigger than this???

I'd hate to be the ball boy.

?

Puttah

  • 1860
Re: Frame of reference experiments for Sceptimatic
« Reply #387 on: March 20, 2013, 02:57:36 AM »
Picture for Sceptimatic

Gladys Roy and Ivan Unger play tennis on the wing of a biplane in flight, 1925. Photograph: Museum Syndicate.

http://blogs.airspacemag.com/daily-planet/2013/01/tennis-anyone/

And that photo must be geniune, because in the background you can clearly see that the earth is flat  :D
How is wimbledon still bigger than this???

I'd hate to be the ball boy.

LOL!  ;D
Scepti, this idiocy needs to stop and it needs to stop right now. You are making a mockery of this fine forum with your poor trolling. You are a complete disgrace.