Calling Out Establishment Bullshit Again

http://sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/01/140120090649.htm

In the above article it states that "cold dark matter cosmology" predicts that galaxies should grow from the inside out. What bullshit. Halton Arp predicted this a long time ago! He stated that quasars are ejected from active galaxies which then grow into much larger galaxies themselves.

Cold dark matter = bullshit.

They are literally trying to backtrack so hard now that they completely avoid using his name and the fact that establishment priests and their Big Bang were wrong from the beginning. Here is Halton Arp's wikipedia article:

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

Here is an entire documentary that outlines his discovery:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yTfRy0LTD0

Watch all the parts and ignore establishment physics. They are trying to cover their asses now because they are trying to save face. Bunch of fools!

Pierre-Marie Robitaille and the Establishment's Conditioning Program

I have been finding lots of great dissident material. Apparently science is much more lost than I thought.

Here are Mr. Robitaille's works on vixra.org:

http://vixra.org/author/pierre-marie_robitaille

It is suggested to the reader to pay attention to both his writings, and the people who think he is a "crank". This is called critical thinking and is a lost skill in establishment science. The students are trained rats. Here is a good excerpt from the thunderbolts project forum:

About half way down.

""Tom Van Flandern commented to us:

I have taken aside several colleagues whose pet theories are now mainstream doctrine, and asked quizzically what it would mean to them personally if an alternative idea ultimately prevailed. To my initial shock (I was naïve enough that I did not see this coming), to a person, the individuals I asked said they would leave the field and do something else for a living. Their egos, the adulation they enjoy, and the satisfaction that they were doing something important with their lives, would be threatened by such a development. As I pondered this, it struck me that their vested interests ran even deeper than if they just had a financial stake in the outcome (which, of course, they do because of grants and promotions). So a challenger with a replacement idea would be naïve to see the process as anything less than threatening the careers of some now-very-important people, who cannot be expected to welcome that development regardless of its merit." (1 August 2002)

What a find! This is exactly the type of stuff we need to be collecting in this thread. The pieces to this puzzle are mostly already out there. They are simply spread out, and we oftentimes have to use analogy or metaphor to "see" them. But, in this case, we are given a window into the psyche of the professional scientist, and what we see reveals a divergence between thinking like a scientist and the culture which dominates professional science today. I don't want to suggest that Jeff Schmidt's work is the only rubric available for deconstructing scientific culture, but his book, Disciplined Minds, suggests an explanation: The decision to train scientists to fit into large organizations involves creating a culture which refuses to question assumptions. By having students memorize stacks of problem sets littered with algebraic tricks, the point is to train graduate students to avoid questioning the assumptions inherent to their parent organization. This parent organization starts out as the physics discipline itself, and then, if they happen to go into industry, that mindset is redirected towards inviting them to adopt the framework of whatever organization they end up in.""

Rupert Sheldrake: The Science Delusion

I agree with Rupert Sheldrake. Science has taken assumptions and made them into dogmas. The spirit of free inquiry is dead inside of the establishment. This means establishment science is ripe for a huge shaking up. If you are employed by establishment and you are reading this, please pull your head out of your ass. If you cannot do this, I will forcibly remove it for you.

I have my own "science delusion" fact to add if Mr. Sheldrake is interested. It was assumed without evidence that a "star" is different than a "planet". It was assumed that "stars" are big, hot and bright, and "planets" were small, cold and dim.

Yet they are the same objects. The young stars are big, hot and bright, the old stars are small cold and dim.

Stars are new planets.

Planets are ancient stars.

They are the exact same objects, stellar evolution is planet formation itself.


The assumption that has solidified into dogma was the assumption that stars and planets were mutually exclusive. They are not. Thus if you tell any astronomer or astrophysicist this guess what you will get? A bunch of ridicule and hatred. This fact of nature literally means ALL establishment astrophysicists have been wrong about star evolution since, well, forever! They are literally standing on the closest star, would they know it? They would probably not, their education gets in the way of their learning.

Establishment astronomers/astrophysicists are suffering the "science delusion", a sickness of the mind.

How to make a Discovery

I need to post this for future readers. It is easy to make a discovery like I have, you just need to use the organ that sits on top of your shoulders in a different manner than what is taught in school.

Here is what is taught in school:

Everything you are learning here is correct and true.



Here is how you need to use your brain and thoughts to make discovery:

Everything you are learning here is partially correct and some of it is completely bogus bullshit.



If a person can learn to look at scientists and their interpretations/assumptions with the eyes of an investigative researcher they will make discoveries. I guarantee it. This approach although doesn't work immediately, works.

It has been a dream of mine since I was a child to explain what the Earth really is. It's not just a big bunch of rocks formed from smaller rocks clumping together because of gravity. It is an ancient star, many billions of years old. It is a really ancient version of what we see in the night sky, a star. Earth is an evolved star.

Mr. Charles Chandler and the Irony of New Scientific Insight

"As concerns how regimented the scientific community is, anybody who disagrees with that should just go over to the JREF or CosmoQuest forums, and say anything at all that isn't quite kosher, and wait 5 minutes. Yes, you're going to get hammered!!! And yes, it's plainly obvious that they have somehow come to believe that their way is the only way. They even seem to think that they're doing you a favor by smacking you down. After all, the sooner you realize how foolish you've been, in thinking outside of the box, the sooner you'll fall in with the lemmings and get happy again. It worked for them, didn't it? Some of us don't get pleasure out of running with a pack of fools, but I guess that's our problem, right?"

Stellar Metamorphosis Thread







Reader, check this out in the CosmoQuest forums:

Notice how most of the threads are locked in the "Against the Mainstream" portion. This is no coincidence.


Against the Mainstream Threads


Notice how most of the threads are NOT locked in the "Science and Technology" portion.


Science and Technology Threads


What would benefit them from locking threads? Yes, you guessed it reader. They are threatening. They are toxic to the lemmings of establishment science. Science is literally trying to correct itself, but is prevented by the people who think they are doing you a favor! Irony at its finest!

Different Solar/Stellar Models and EU Conference 2014

If you are unfamiliar with the fact that establishment astrophysics does not allow for new insight or understanding, then you have a lot of catching up to do.

Here is my friend, Charles Chandler, and his website concerning different stellar/solar models.

http://qdl.scs-inc.us/2ndParty/Pages/6961.html

Establishment astrophysics will insult and ridicule those who have different models, it is up to the revolutionary to expose their censorship and unwillingness to consider alternatives for the sake of money, grants, titles, careers and status quo.

The revolution is gaining momentum. For those who wish to meet with many other revolutionaries, please attend the Electric Universe Conference in New Mexico. I do believe the Natural Philosophy Alliance will also be in attendance.

Here is their website concerning the conference for those who are interested:

http://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/2013/09/10/eu2014-home-page/

Electric Universe and Establishment Physics Root Assumption

I want to post my thoughts and opinions on Electric Universe.

I think a lot of it is very important and correct, I think a lot of it is absolute hogwash, just like establishment science.

The question we need to ask is this: What is hogwash and what is usable, workable, helpful?

Another question we should be asking is this: What hogwash does the EU believe the same as the establishment? I know the answer to this. It's the assumption that stars and planets are mutually exclusive.

The EU believes stars eject smaller solid worlds.

The establishment believes stars form and their left over remains form smaller solid worlds.

Stellar metamorphosis states that smaller solid worlds are the end result of a star's evolution.  It states that smaller solid worlds are stars that are many billions of years old and the stars that are big hot and bright are relatively young. It is a change in world view. It is a very scary change to those who have been conditioned their entire lives regardless of the facts of nature. It's a change that I will not see in my lifetime. I will be long dead and gone (and I'm 29) by the time these establishment and EU fools admit it.

It's not rocket science reader. Planets are big hot and bright when they are young, as they age they cool, lose mass, shrink and solidify, combining all their elements into molecular structure. Basic star science is apparently blasphemy to the establishment and EU.