|LoFi version for PDAs||Help Search Members Calendar|
|Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )||Resend Validation Email|
Posted: Apr 28 2012, 07:09 PM
Joined: 28-April 12
Positive Feedback: 0%
Feedback Score: 0
Hello, I am a science buff and have a decent background in electronics and design, however when it comes to far out physics theories, I of course do not stand up to par with actual professionals in the field, nor would I attempt to. So I have come here for some advice and input.
I am also an amateur film maker, with a particular interest at this time in a documentary that I am producing that debunks a couple of widely spread conspiracy theories that are all over the Internet. These would be Chem-trails and HAARP(as weather/earthquake weapon) For the most part these are easy to debunk, and not at all hard to find the chinks in the theories.
However, someone has thrown this in front of me and I was wondering if anyone from here might be able to shed more light on this paper and it's contents, as to the accuracy, and or the lack there of. I have read one thread on here that involved this authors previous work. A Prof. Fran de Aquino involving his theories on quantum gravity which is here:
The paper in question that I am interested in, is this:
proceeded by the normal h**p://
You will need to use translate I believe...
Thank you in advance for your assistance,
This post has been edited by evetsnalon on Apr 28 2012, 07:17 PM
Posted: May 1 2012, 07:19 PM
Group: Power Member
Joined: 19-June 09
Positive Feedback: 87.5%
Feedback Score: 33
We addressed deAquino's out of the mainstream views from a fundamental physics perspective here:
His new paper is given here: http://www.users.elo.com.br/~deaquino/ELF%20Earthquakes
...and he EXTRAPOLATES from the same equations and presumptions we discussed earlier.
I think if you are going to try to debunk de Aquino's recent conclusions you should go back to the fundamental errors, equations, and extrapolations upon which his other (earthquake) conclusions are based.
We discussed them briefly, including falsely representing a gravity elimination device.
Others may want to resurrect that discussion, and add some light.
This post has been edited by Lunarlanding on May 1 2012, 07:23 PM