See this
In Light Years explains your query
Its free
See Tom this habitual twisting of facts and untruths always has a tendency to boil my blood at times
One such person has been the noted scientist, Dr. Marcel Vogel, research chemist for IBM for 22 years; inventor of coating systems for hard discs and a pioneer in liquid crystal displays. Using an electron microscope, he was able to study one of Billy’s metal samples which was said to be a piece from the “beamship’s” hull in the third of seven stages of processing. In his metallurgical analysis, he was able to determine that it possessed some very unusual properties; rare elements, including thulium and rhenium, had been bonded together in a non-electrical cold fusion synthesis, a process still unknown on earth today. He commented: “. . . I cannot explain the metal sample. By any known combination of material I could not put it together myself, as a scientist. With any technology that I know of, we could not achieve this on this planet . . .”
Now he is also a research chemist
It does nothing of the sort.
The whole thing is just a few lines of summary of selected pages with no real information.
Geezzz are you telling me that you have never made punctuation and grammatical mistakes in your life let alone here on this forum.
Choose
The pot or the kettle
Search deeper and ye shall find
Or do I have to spoon feed again
You just lost that last miniscule thread of credibility.
All these professional can’t be wrong all at the same time.
Why do people like yourself have such an intense aversion for the truth
I don’t. The difference is my truth is grounded in the real world.
Why has the topic changed to 9/11?
Yes spoon feed. I am not going to search through multiple books trying to find the few lines you want read.
That’s part of how things are done here. You link to the specific part you want others to see. You can even quote a small portion.(fair use)
A few lines or a short paragraph is usually acceptable.
Hey one book and one book only dude
The light years by Gary Kinder
Its a free book and instead of taking things in isolation and lose the context vital for adquate understanding you must take into consideration the whole in order to understand the part
When I first realized the profundity of the Meier case I was astonded. I thought the religious and scientific communitie would experience an earthquake as this truth was announced to them. But I later realized it’s not likely to happen that way. Most people are too ingrained and conditioned by their beliefs and deceived thought situation. I now realize the Meier case must permiate into earth humans consciousness slowly without causing overwhelm. And that is happening. It’s happening first on an UNCONSCIOUS level which eventually becomes a real awarness. For example, it appears to me the resignation of the last Pope was a result of this slow spiritual evolution that occured in the Vatican and in the populace.
I predict that within 10-15 years online discussions like this will see a MAJORITY of proponents of the Meier case Truth rather than the deceived “believers” now on display.
Accusing others of lying is not permitted in Great Debates. Do not do so again.
Warning issued.
Good deal. Then there’s no further need to post, right? Because of the inevitability of the eventual acceptable of his “evidence”?
Unfortunately, it’s readily apparent that it’s because the opposite is true that you feel it is necessary to so heavily defend the work. Obviously true work is accepted quickly, not after 10-15 years.
Bullshit. No one has time to read an entire book looking for a specific point.
That’s one possibility.
Another is that most people instantly see that Meier is batshit crazy, and those that follow him are too ingrained and conditioned by their beliefs and deceived thought situation (whatever that means).
I’ll put it on my calendar.
I’ll put that on my calendar, too.
So there’s no proof now, but there will be in 10-16 years? If it doesn’t happen, will you retract your claims?
Why not? Is science decided by voting on the most popular postulate?
Truth? TRUTH? * You can’t handle the truth!*
Why is it always ten years down the road? “UFO’s will be conclusively shown to be real in 10 years, just you wait you debunker you!” (heard that one in 1995). “Scientology is expanding like wildfire and will be the biggest religion in the USA in 10 years.” (late 90’s) “Within 10 years we’ll see an explosion in the number of people who know the trvth about demolition being used on 9/11” (heard in 2006…OK they’ve got a few years yet but kinda going backwards.). “In 10 years the only skeptics will be tired, old men and well see a magnificent increase in the world’s use of true psychic powers!” (said several times, last heard in 2001).
Bah!
Truth hurts, (although I have never seen it make blood boil, before.)
Again: he is not a metallurgist. He could well be the most brilliant expert on crystals in the entire world. That does not mean he knows squat about metallurgy.
We see the same sort of silliness in every CT threaad on the WTC/Pentagon attacks. Someone finds some long list of “experts” who claim that the towers could not have been brought down by enormous, fuel-laden aircraft crashing into them at hundreds of miles per hour. Then we look at the list of “experts” and we find physicists, chemists, mathematicians, mechanical engineers, and a host of smart people who are simply not trained to investigate or speculate intelligently on what it takes to make a skyscraper built in the fashion of the WTC towers fall down.
It is all very well that he had access to a powerful microscope, but there is no evidence that he had the training to see what was necessary to discover the composition of the object. Lots of the CT “experts” on the WTC can wave around truly impressive appearing mathematical formulae to “prove” their pet theories, but they still lack the training to know what it is they are figuring and they are still wrong.
Getting upset that other people recognize the inadequacies of your arguments is not very productive, but I am not your physician, so I suppose you can take your Lisinopril and watch your own blood pressure.
Yep. With not a word abut a single hour of training as a metallurgist.
- ::: shrug ::: *
1995? Shit, I heard that one in the 1950’s. From J. Allen Hynek and a dozen others, most with books to sell. The deadline keeps getting pushed back. Wonder why that is?
Bah, indeed.
Hmm.
I just noticed that you are linking to the ae911 site, as well.
That would explain your credulous acceptance of stuff that is just wrong, I guess.
Now, stop and actually think about the point I have now made in several posts. Lots of smart people make mistakes, (or get deluded), when they step outside their fields of expertise. If Vogel thought that he had found something truly important, his best option would have been to take the object to someone who was trained in metallurgy for a second opinion. I don’t think that he is a terrible person for failing to do that. I do think that his “discovery” outside his field of expertise is unremarkable if it is not supported by someone who is actually trained in the field. Everyone is entitled to make mistakes. Pointing at one person’s error as “proof” of anything does not make it true; it only means that the claim is still unsubstantiated.