The typical "internet government conspiracy theory" has to refer technologies that are far from being widely acknowledged to be mundane science and/or to programs that involve motives that are far from being widely acknowledged as being legitimate. I've made no such assumptions and I defy you to come up with a URL to a theory that is more plausible.
On the other hand if you, at long last, have actually come up with arithmetic, you might try not only providing a URL instead of merely referring to some menu on some website, but applying that arithmetic in an explanation of the observe phenomena. On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 5:15 PM, ChemE Stewart <cheme...@gmail.com> wrote: > Actually I have calcs now on the menu on my site. I also show multi-body > problem formulas and calculations for the core of the Earth. I have also > been tracking orbits for 2 months and predicting low pressure systems. I > am building an orbital model through the Google Earth API and fitting it to > two Hurricane tracks from 2012. Also have a provisional patent filed. > > All you have is another government conspiracy theory I can find plastered > all over the Internet. > > I have falsifiable claims, one being that double rainbows with a dark > band are thermodynamic and pull a vacuum and cool and condense water vapor. > > > On Thursday, February 21, 2013, James Bowery wrote: > >> Your don't have a theory, ChemE. You have a lot of words and pictures at >> a blog. No arithmetic. I've asked you for arithmetic repeatedly and you >> refuse to be forthcoming. >> >> Moreover, you pretend that I said nothing about classified information. >> >> >> >> On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 4:50 PM, ChemE Stewart <cheme...@gmail.com>wrote: >> >> Wow, I thought my theory was strange. >> I think our space tracking capabilities for high speed >> celestial objects are woefully lacking and we are sitting ducks. We have >> civilians with HD video cams that are detecting these objects before the >> governments. >> >> >> >> On Thursday, February 21, 2013, James Bowery wrote: >> >> OK so I'm going to go way out on a limb here and propose an explanation >> for the "coincidence": >> >> It has been known for decades that asteroidal resources are a potential >> material resource bonanza and also potential kinetic weapons. The fact >> that it has taken until recently for private enterprise to enter the >> picture<http://singularityhub.com/2013/02/19/interview-diamandis-planetary-resources-to-claim-high-value-asteroids-with-robotic-beacons/> >> should >> not blind us to the fact that detailed plans for asteroid husbandry have >> existed for decades and that the spy satellite technology, now being used >> by private asteroid prospecting, as been in use by government agencies for >> decades -- including the military. >> >> We don't need to hypothesis exotic technologies to posit the potential >> "black project" existence of asteroid husbandry technology that has enjoyed >> a decades-long maturation period. The technologies existed, in >> unclassified form, as early as the Apollo program. This is all that is >> necessary to posit the "means" and "opportunity" (not the motive) for an >> artificial "coincidence" between an earth-approaching asteroid and an >> artificially controlled meteor: >> >> If advanced spy satellite technology had been used to do asteroid >> prospecting over the last few decades, it is easy to imagine a much greater >> precision assay of earth approaching asteroids exists in the "black" than >> is known -- or at least admittedly known -- by unclassified sources. This >> provides the "opportunity" in that it may have been known many years, >> possibly decades, in advance that a 50m asteroid was going to pass within >> GSO of Earth on February 15, 2013. >> >> As to means, if a nuclear power plant and/or large solar array were >> placed on an earth-approaching meteoroid of modest mass, simply throwing >> chunks of rock off its surface -- particularly while at apogee -- could >> provide sufficient delta-v over the course of years to direct it to enter >> earth's atmosphere at a low angle of incidence (thereby guaranteeing no >> substantial serious ground effect), and do so in such a way that its entry >> would approximately coincide with the near pass of the asteroid. >> >> Now for the motive: >> >> In intelligence agencies (yes I have had dealings including working in a >> SCIF for months under daily review by the Joint Chiefs and Jasons on an >> 'imminent nuclear war' priority project, so I do know a little) there is >> something called a "signature" which provides a "plausible deniability" >> cover to the mundanes while ensuring the message gets through to the >> opposing side's intelligence agencies. Such a statistical anomaly >> involving potential weaponry fits the bill of a "signature". The message >> is simply this: We have sufficient control of the asteroid's little >> brother that you might be wise to consider the possibility that we have >> control of the asteroid. >> >> Remaining questions regarding the motive (as in means, motive and >> opportunity) are: >> >> Why Russia? >> >> Why now? >> >> >> >> On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 4:00 PM, James Bowery <jabow...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> A particularly relevant passage for those who get stuck on "clustering" >> of random events (ToE: Theory of Everything): >> >> (R) Random universe. Actually there is a much simpler way of obtaining a >> ToE. Consider an infinite >> sequence of random bits (fair coin tosses). It is easy to see that any >> finite pattern, i.e., any finite >> binary sequence, occurs (actually infinitely often) in this string. Now >> consider our observable universe >> quantized at e.g. Planck level, and code the whole space-time universe >> into a huge bit string. If the >> universe ends in a big crunch, this string is finite. (Think of a digital >> high resolution 3D movie of the >> >>
