If people cannot work out the absurdity of a civilization capable of traveling 100's of light years distances (minimum) and solving problems which our science can barely comprehend, and than getting captured by US military (a dumb institution if there ever was one), they obviously are incapable of any semblance of logical thinking.
What puzzles me is why they need to travel billions of miles to another planet just to anally probe the backward inhabitants of that world.
When we develop the technology for interstellar space travel, is that what we will use it for? Mutilating livestock and checking the prostates of the natives?
__________________
.
“What you ask about is music. What you like is sound. Now music and sound are akin, but they are not the same.”
— Confucius
You gotta figure that if any of them ever REALLY found a live (or dead!) Alien, or Nessie or Bigfoot, whatever, that it would be Front Page News and not 'revealed' in the last five minutes of a weekly TV show on basic cable.
...
There may be really intriguing facts presented without it being 'evidence'. So if you're interested, or in storytelling and psychology, those shows can be quite fun and revealing.
..That is the sign that is human made flying machine based on (Reverse Engineering). ...
Wrong. Your guessing that it's been reverse engineered, how do you know? There's zeeeero evidence of that. If the military can build a F-16, they can build a saucer. They already did back in the 50ies or so.
Try to think sceptically before you conclude.
Wrong. Your guessing that it's been reverse engineered, how do you know? There's zeeeero evidence of that. If the military can build a F-16, they can build a saucer. They already did back in the 50ies or so.
Try to think sceptically before you conclude.
This is logical explanation of Benjamin Fulford story.
Look at the last few second of video. On the back of flying saucer is the signal light that blinks. That is the sign that is human made flying machine based on (Reverse Engineering). Sound of the fighters is original, when you take into consideration the hills on the video.
Thanks, Den, for sharing info on tuning ideas. I have seen them before. Looking at their website I was unimpressed, as their ideas seemed very amateurish.
INMHO, if you want to use music/vibrations for a more direct physiological or psycho-acoustic effect you have to tune to a space you are in, rather than to some predetermined theory. I do use it sometimes, when need arises. And I cannot see that you can use instruments like keyboards at all. As the situation develops you need to control the pitch and timbre directly. And you need to use your feelings or intuition, rather than a pocket calculator or digital tuner. Simple use is still practiced in Mongolia by camel herdsmen. There can be no doubt of the effect as it is on animal (camel) so any human auto-suggestion is bypassed.
__________________
"You've got to Dig it to Dig it, you Dig?"
Thelonious Monk
UFO seems to be off topic now. I really don't know anything about it.
I just wanted to share this info with Tuning instruments.
Nothing of those links are mine, I just wanted to share the links that I found.
That is all.
I'm sorry if I came across as a disinterested ass, actually I thought the F-16/saucer video was very interesting and quite stunning, thanks for posting!
But when you make statements like "Officially they admit now" or "That is the sign that is human made flying machine based on (Reverse Engineering)", then it's hard not to disagree and comment on that, primarily.
Basically, if a 'down-to-Earth' explanation exists (those UFO patents/craft are just engineers tinkering around with funky designs), we can't defend making extra-terrestrial conclusions, because the probability opposed to the down-to-Earth explanation is virtually non-existant. Why? Because no court-room-grade proof of extraterrestrial activity has ever been presented despite much popular attention to the phenomenon and lots of photos and videos everywhere.
Also, like Joeq said: consider that your government is made up of people. They most likely don't know anything about space you can't find on the internet, or at a university library. And when they see odd activity on radar, they really don't know how to interpret it, so it's just 'noise'. Here's what the White House has uttered about the topic, historically, an excellent angle imo, even though the presenters overinterpret everything:
Sadly, the lack of a clear answer from the authorities is a huge opening for conspiracy theories. People desire a conclusion, one way or the other. And since it is likewise impossible to prove that there are no aliens with incredible technology or bots sent out on million-year long voyages, it's still a fascinating topic. And on the same token, the G-men can't say they know there are no aliens cruising around without being wrong and 'liars'. That's the Catch-22 for them, and the go-signal for good/paranoid stories.
Sadly, the lack of a clear answer from the authorities is a huge opening for conspiracy theories.
The lack of a clear answer also keeps America's enemies guessing. Rumors and speculation are often encouraged as disinformation to keep the real secrets secret.
Incorrect conspiracy theories are the best cover for real secrets.
During the Cold War, even the most ridiculous pseudo-scientific suggestions were heavily investigated on both sides, just in case there was something to them. At a cost of millions of dollars, which is, in the long run, is just another way of bleeding your enemy dry.
I agree to a very large extent, though I do think music is mathematics; just as the universe is. I do also think there is a number of possibilities for the execution of it that nears infinite. What I'm trying to determine, is that if those "out of tune" pieces that 'speak to you' are actually out of tune, or in a natural tuning we don't quite understand, or choose to ignore.
It's off topic, really, but music is not mathematics, neither is universe mathematics. Mathematics is a tool by which we try to understand workings of things. You would be surprised how limited the mathematics actually is. Many everyday simple things are not explained by mathematics, just approximated. Even circumference of a circle as related to radius is an approximation (since Pi has an infinite number of digits). Much more so for slightly more interesting curves. And I am talking here in only VERY simple problems in 2 dimensions. Music is a lot more complex phenomenon than a line on a piece of paper.Mathematics simplifies problems so they become manageable and often solves them only to an accuracy that is "good enough".
PI only has an infinite number of digits in a decimal system or other counting system. The notion of the circumference divided by diameter is still valid. You're talking baout the USE of mathematics - the actual approximations or calculations. Mathematics isn't just the arithmetic.
CALCULATIONS often simplify parametric values ... mathematics do not.
PI only has an infinite number of digits in a decimal system or other counting system. The notion of the circumference divided by diameter is still valid. You're talking baout the USE of mathematics - the actual approximations or calculations. Mathematics isn't just the arithmetic.
CALCULATIONS often simplify parametric values ... mathematics do not.
Indeed. I did not say that the notion of the circumference divided by diameter is not valid. Just a simple example that even in a simple problem mathematics only offers an approximation. When working out the value of a golden mean one uses an iteration, that is making the inaccuracy smaller and smaller until the inacuracy is negligible for a given purpose. I just quote these examples to show the limitations of mathematics. I also think of mathematics as a tool, so could not go along with "universe IS mathematics" or music "IS" mathematics.
I am aware that mathematics is more than just algebra, but before getting into deep waters, discussion of A = 444Hz or A= 440 is algebra so far.
When I was a kid people used to tell me "Don't believe everything you read in a book." This maxim goes doubly for the internet...
While the videos are impressive they're almost universally a hoax, CGI has gotten to a place where it's easy to do a high quality video on the internet that looks real. I find it easier to believe someone chose to create a fake rather than accept, based only on evidence that is easily faked, that other intelligences have violated the laws of physics as we know them. It doesn't say anything about the truth, it just speaks to the likelihood. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
It's a shame really that people get so caught up in obsessing over the Rockefeller's mind controlling with alternate tunings while in reality we ignore our government waging illegal wars and handing our economies over to corporate interests. Beam ME up Scotty...
It's a shame really that people get so caught up in obsessing over the Rockefeller's mind controlling with alternate tunings while in reality we ignore our government waging illegal wars and handing our economies over to corporate interests. Beam ME up Scotty...
Indeed the Evil in our world is not "hidden" in secret codes or "revealed" in a frame-by-frame analysis of the Video.
The vast majority of the Evil in our world is right there on the Front Page every single day. We get so used to it, we don't even see it. We are all frogs being boiled.
PI only has an infinite number of digits in a decimal system or other counting system. The notion of the circumference divided by diameter is still valid. You're talking baout the USE of mathematics - the actual approximations or calculations. Mathematics isn't just the arithmetic.
CALCULATIONS often simplify parametric values ... mathematics do not.
Exactly my point, I was not talking about the practice of mathematics so much as the underlying relationships for which we use math to try to explain.
as mathematics is just the system we composed to measure and deal with everything in our world.
Exactly my point. You can believe that music is maths or universe is maths, but I think than you have it backwards.
You are perfectly free to think so, and i am not really interested in arguing finer points here, as both you and Narcoman seem to not quite understand my point. I was just pointing out that mathematics is a tool, and a very fine and beautiful one (I love it) but it has it's limitations.
And tuning to some frequency or other is not necessarily going to make your music great all by itself. My problem with music in the video posted is not the tuning to this or that, but the music itself, which I consider pretty awful midi ramblings, and no amount of mathematics is going to change that.
Undeniably, math is a human system. It is a rationalization that comes after the created was created.
Basically, it is not odd that you can learn how to calculate the square X by knowing another X. But you don't know anything essential about X (like who made the square, and how?), you just know how to calculate X.
If you see patterns in nature and interpret them as signs that there is (an) Order in the universe, you are thinking transcendentally (like Thoureau or Emerson). They saw patterns in nature and described them as signs of god. That's quite cool by me, I love that shit, but nonetheless, it's not natural science.
Math works because we inhabitat a material universe. Matter (at least where we are) behaves in certain ways and has certain proporties, essentially it feels and appears 'steady'. Thus we can calculate (predict) events in the future with math. Except perhaps on the quantum level. Here math must adopt to another order.
PS: music is not math any more than your heartbeat. Again, that's putting the system before the essence. I know some musicians who sound like math, but that does not make music math.
Lovely. Some guy talking on youtube is not a conclusive proof of anything for me personally. But I assure you if i were to suddenly believe in presence of aliens on Earth I would definitely prefer to believe in ones that make beautiful pictures in some fields, than ones that fraternize with murdering morons of US military.
New Reply 
