[geocentrism] Re: conspiracies and lies
- From: "philip madsen" <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2007 11:02:36 +1000
Further to Paul D talking about "industrious and dedicated people who labour
daily to make these events happen"
Let me tell you a story to really contradict the idea that money does not come
first over dedication.
During the time around when the US helped and supported the Soviets when the
woman cosmonaut was lost in space for a period, I worked for NASA's Satellite
Tracking station near Woomera. Immediately prior to that time, I worked for the
British Blue Streak space Program on another base in the same region. I was
dedicated. When I found out that this program was an "exercise in futility"
Space was never the objective, and that the launch trajectory was westwards, I
complained.. I saw no point in laying cables up a tower with millimetre
precision, knowing they were to serve no purpose but be pulled down again. I
was hauled before the project executive manager and this is what he said,
confirming my disgust.
"If you don't like ensuring the quite comfortable pay check you get every
month, I can assure you I do! I am not going to have you upsetting that. If
you don't like it you can leave."
I did leave immediately. I was not slave to the money coming in over
principle.. I had left a very good permanent career at MT Isa Mines, to work in
this scientific field. I moved to NASA, whom I observed were into fair dinkum
satellite research.
The point! Everyone on that project were happy to just take the money.
Ideals did not come into their vocabulary..I might add, that this attitude was
quite common to the people at NASA as well.. Job security was number one, and
climbing the ladder of promotion, not space. Please don't try to spin the
idealism card at us.. It just aint true..
Philip.
----- Original Message -----
From: philip madsen
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Sunday, August 26, 2007 9:05 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] conspiracies and lies
Paul, you are twisting motives or jumping to false conclusions by saying that
GS resorts to ad hominum attacks such as accusations of lying, in order to
cover an inability to justify our science. It is true that suggestions of
scientific impossibilities have been raised to explain a moon landing hoax, but
this was not to imply Nasa falsified science intentionally to support false
science, but rather it was a political expediency.
If I was one of the "hundreds of thousands of capable, industrious and
dedicated people who labour daily to make these events happen", I should not be
insulted if a gigantic fraud took place, believing as many did at the time,
that an important security precaution was/is necessary for the protection of
the entire world from the Evil Communistic Empire. The propaganda war was
necessary, and that by the way is also a conspiracy, but not evil as the
definitions you tendered elsewhere insisted were a necessary component .
"harmful or illegal" .Conspiracies can be altruistic.
However apart from the political initiative, why was the hoax necessary, when
the science and engineering was so simple?
Here we may indeed speculate that the science used was flawed perhaps. Such
is not beyond even your acceptance as you have already admitted.
However I do not agree with such a position in regard to the evaluating the
success or failure of a moon landing. I have always maintained that radiation
has been the main obstacle to manned exploration of space.
The geocentric position has a much harder problem to answer, as regards the
geostationary satellite, than has the heliocentric position as regards the
mechanics of simply making a safe landing on the moon. I mean, the mechanics
would HAVE be identical in either scenario.
I say have to be identical for the following reasons...
1. All of the orbiting and landings have been successful using standard
text book physics and engineering.
2. I firmly believe that the geocentric position to be the absolute truth.
This is why I have always maintained that we have the greater task to prove
our case. We have no sound basis upon which we could accuse HC followers of
either falsifying science, or of being unable to observe reality.
So how can I then justify my belief in No2 above, not from religion, but from
science?
I do so by insisting that science must return to consideration of the aether
as a real phenomena.
This has been the mainstream of GS research, and not only GS, but quite a
few heliocentrists scientists as well. This latter for obvious reasons upsets
Einsteinian relativity cults, and if there is any deceit or coverup it is
amongst these, even if not intentional.
Philip.
----- Original Message -----
From: Paul Deema
To: Geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Saturday, August 25, 2007 1:46 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Earth and science
Now a significant percentage of missions end in resounding successes, and
the usual GS response seems to be restricted to the simple unsubstantiated
accusation that the HC fraternity is lying. That's just a tad difficult to
swallow. It is also insulting to the hundreds of thousands of capable,
industrious and dedicated people who labour daily to make these events happen.
Paul D
Dear Paul,
I would like to comment here. You are quite right about it being insuting
to the people engaged in the work, but it is not us who are insulting them but
their employers. It's no different than all the people, who make a nice living,
from the deception of evolution. Do you think that the people who who are all
part of NASA etc would make a hallabaloo about being paid hansomely for being
part of a con? There are some people who have taken a moral stance and blew
whistles about their work but they are easily blanked out by the rest. 9/11 is
a very good example of this and so are the Apollo missions. The evidence
against them is overwhelming but the people who have the power, have enough of
that power to just simply ignore protestations.
Jack
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.484 / Virus Database: 269.12.6/971 - Release Date: 24/08/2007
2:59 PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.484 / Virus Database: 269.12.8/973 - Release Date: 25/08/2007
5:00 PM
Other related posts:
