UFO's and Flying Disks

As a child I've always wondered if there is alien life out there. I remember being about 6 years old and catching a peek at a show called X-Files and seeing an alien on the TV. It scared me very deeply as it resonated inside of me. It did not feel as if it was the "boogeyman", but I did feel a realness about seeing the alien on the TV show.

It felt real. Like seeing a tiger in real life and being afraid of it, and seeing an alien on TV and being afraid of it were similar. So I have to admit, aliens have sort of always been real to me. A creature with a much larger head and frail grey body seemed to me as a child something that was completely possible. I mean, there are creatures on Earth that do not have hands or legs! We call them fish! They are completely natural to us in normal settings, but this is only because we have been conditioned to them existing our whole lives.

Think about what a person would feel like if they had never been introduced to the concept or even the structure of a fish as it swam in the ocean, and then one day they were thrown in the ocean and they encountered a large shark. Scary right? How would they make sense of it? I know. Since they were not familiar with swimming creatures, they would be called mermaids. They would be people with large ugly mouths and fins. People who rule the oceans so to speak. Its easy to connect the dots when you use your mind. The "mermaid" was a concept invented by people who were not familiar with swimming creatures that were the size of human beings.

Back to the topic at hand. Being familiar with something means you are used to seeing it on a daily basis. Whether it be on TV shows, or in nature or whatever. Familiarity is comfortable. It doesn't matter how scary and real it is, if someone is familiar with it the edge is dulled quite a bit. Instead of there existing this civilization of killer humans who eat unsuspecting sailors, we have sharks that are attracted to objects that appear as their regular prey, seals and some types of fish. Being familiar with it makes it easy to digest, it makes the concept not so scary and fantasy driven.

I have been making UFOs and flying disks familiar, by studying people's interaction with them and the eyewitness accounts of them moving about our atmosphere, surveying the area, and in some cases allegedly abducting humans and livestock for experimentation. I have been making them less scary and more familiar. I suggest others do the same.

It is actually one of my life goals to figure out how they work. They reached here from "there", this means we can go "there" from here. Those that deny this simply do not want to make the concept familiar. It takes a level of emotional/mental maturity to understand something like this. I do not expect my readers to consider it, but I assure you, looking over the information will make the concept of aliens visiting Earth much less scary.

For those people who have accounts of their own, please make a written report to the National UFO Reporting Center. nuforc.org There you will find that there have been many tens of thousands of sightings of unusual objects. We can study them if we want, like detectives.

Clear Communication is not Appreciated

http://www.bigear.org/CSMO/HTML/CS08/cs08p08.htm

http://www.bigear.org/CSMO/HTML/CS08/cs08p08.htm

Clearly communicating yourself in a scientific setting is not appreciated.

Something I kinda knew. Complexity is viewed as being more valuable, why? It keeps people's minds spinning I guess? They have patterns of thought that are full of mumbo jumbo and getting rid of it would throw a wrench in the works? I don't know.

I do know that by clearly communicating my own theory of star evolution, I will not be considered as a serious philosopher/scientist. Maybe I should muck up the papers with verbiage and include a bunch of meaningless math equations. Then people will take me seriously?

Hubble's Opinion on the "Big Bang"

"Meanwhile, on the basis of the evidence now available, apparent discrepancies between theory and observation must be recognized.  A choice is presented, as once before in the days of Copernicus, between a strangely small, finite universe and a sensibly infinite universe plus a new principle of nature."


https://sites.google.com/site/bigbangcosmythology/home/edwinhubble/ 

So, the big bang believers think the universe is strangely small and finite:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_bang

And people with common sense believe in the more sensible infinite universe, plus a new principle of nature, as did Halton Arp:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halton_Arp

His paper:

http://www.haltonarp.com/articles/intrinsic_redshifts_in_quasars_and_galaxies.pdf

Why Establishment Scientists Disappoint Me

I know its egotistical. I have to say it though.

Establishment astronomers/astrophysicists have no backbone.

They are cowards.

They all know the Big Bang is complete bullshit. Where are all the papers showing how wrong and nonsensical it is? Seriously? They are so concerned with what people think of them, that they are afraid to stand up for what is right!

If there's anything I learned in life, its you will always have haters. God herself could come down to Earth and help people, and there would still be some asshole who's like "faker!" "loser", "dumbass", "fraud".

It's called ridicule. Establishment scientists are scared to death of it. Establishment scientists let fear swing them around by their tails. Not me. Its all carpet bombing and guerrilla warfare from here on out. It's time to make them either put up, or shut up. I'm sick of the Big Bang Creationism propaganda. They are crowding out human ingenuity and discovery. I'm not just talking about myself either. There are literally thousands of scientists who have their ideas ridiculed and censored. Just check out General Science Journal and Vixra.org if you don't believe me.

Special Relativity and General Relativity

I wanted to only write about this stuff extensively only AFTER I understood them.

Long story short, I understand special relativity, all it means is that the speed of light is independent of the source. That's it. We're done. Thousands of papers written on it. Only one sentence needed to fully understand it. It doesn't take years of schooling.

I do not understand general relativity. Or the theory that gravity is a geometric. Only one problem: geometry is measurement. You can measure things all day, all night, it does not mean it explains anything.

So in conclusion:

Special relativity means there is no giant universal clock as everything is relative to its frame of reference (meaning the big bang is nonsense).

General relativity is measurement of gravitation and does not explain its causes. Thus it is not a theory of gravitation but a theory of measuring gravitation. Big difference.

Einstein got ahead of himself. His 1905 paper Special Relativity was awesome and incredibly important. His 1915 paper general relativity has no practical significance to reality. His stature though has lead people down the path of pseudoscience.

Its strange, discover great understanding and then all of a sudden none of your other writings get questioned. I will have to watch out for that.

More Creationists Spewing Dogma and Nonsense

Here are all the papers on BICEP2: http://bicepkeck.org/#papers

Here is my take:

What did they discover? Gravitational waves from the Big Bang?

Wow. I hope they get the Nobel Prize for that. It explains absolutely nothing of significance. Society will move on after this as if it never happened. Let those old guys award themselves prizes and money. In the future we will look back on this and laugh at our own folly. The universe having a creation moment?

If anybody wants my take on the universe it is this:

The universe is eternal, it had no beginning and will have no end. It was never created.

Sure, stars can be born and die, galaxies can be born and die, large scale structures and come into being and then fade away like clouds on a windy day, but the universe as a whole? Shit, that's everything! All that is seen and unseen! Notice the key word: Unseen. So, to have a creation of what you don't even know is there? The epitome of ignorant rambling.

Let the creationists have their last huzzah. Their time is over. They have kept humanity in the dark long enough, but not will award themselves their prizes because of... well, because of political strings being pulled to maintain the smoke and mirrors of Big Bang Creationism. I wonder how much money the Vatican is wiring to the Nobel Committee to keep up the charades?

Establishment and their House of Cards

For the reader it should be made pretty obvious:

If the nebular hypothesis is replaced then their house of cards falls.

1. Nebular hypothesis goes, so does their theory of planet formation from gravity alone go.

2. When gravity isn't the dominate force that creates planets... we then have a serious problem. It means there is another type of force that is more important.

3. Establishment scientists heads and careers:

We first simply needed to replace the nebular hypothesis. Stellar metamorphosis does this:

Stellar Metamorphosis

Stellar Metamorphosis versus Establishment Dogma: The Location of Accretion

http://vixra.org/pdf/1403.0312v1.pdf
Link to Above paper

Establishment dogma and stellar metamorphosis are very different understandings.

The dogma has planets forming out of vacuum, absent a heat source, a gravitating body, etc.

Stellar metamorphosis has planets forming inside of stars as a star is a new planet. One star makes one planet. It is basic star science. The problem is that humans have the two words "planet" and "star" as being mutually exclusive objects because of their nearsightedness of the past recent years.

I would guess about 1992 was the pivotal year in which we realized there are smaller objects floating about in the galaxy similar to Earth. Since most scientists possess no imagination though, there was no way to get alternative theories published. Now that the cat is out of the bag and we have been finding many tens of thousands of stars that are Earth sized, we can come to the more reasonable conclusion that a "planet" is nothing but an evolved star.

We therefore have come full circle. From thinking stars and planets were mutually exclusive, to realizing they are the same objects only in different stages to their evolution. No crazy delusional math is required for the greatest of understandings.

People who realize what I do can monopolize on this information, as it is superior to the Big Bang Creationism and Nebular Hypothesis that gets taught in government sponsored institutions. Basically we can build a theory that makes both Big Bang Creationism and the Nebular Hypothesis obsolete, we don't even have to argue against them anymore. Arguing against them is a waste of time now, they are worthless theories that will bury themselves, like dinosaur fossils.