"Create online Communities of Science enthusiasts that discuss, examine and promote theories based on the premise that we live in an Electric Universe."
The Information Age
We live in amazing times - from virtually anywhere in the world, and with little more than a cell phone, we can explore virtually any subject we desire. The detail and variety of information available is far beyond anything in the past - and it is growing exponentially. Things like the search engine have revolutionized how we find information. Gone are the library card catalogs, phone books and paper maps. Tools like Google Maps, YouTube, Wikipedia, Kahn University and the millions of other websites make it possible for anyone to become knowledgeable about any subject.
In addition in the internet you can find all sides of the story. Our institutions of higher learning have settled into the belief that most of science is 'settled'. They know the truth, so there is little point in questioning the theories or looking into opposing ideas. Simply memorize the facts as they are fed to you, take your tests proving your ability to memorize correctly, and go preach the truth to the uninformed. But don't question or look into alternatives, that's simply a waste of time.
The Internet has created a new kind of scientist. These people are more likely to be open-minded to new ideas. The internet exposes you to many different ideas. In order to make sense of it all you must logically analyze and weigh the differences yourself. This is in stark comparison to University study where the 'correct' theory has already been decided for you.
One of the most significant impacts of the internet is its ability to create communities of people from all over the world. You can find and talk to others with similar interests in seconds. Collaboration tools like Skype, Slack and Google docs makes it possible for people to share and co-create documents.
If you like an article -- or even if you don't like an article, please share it on your facebook page or send out a tweet! We have to bypass the mainstream Science journals and Universities and Social Media is the way to do it. Let's get this out to as many people as possible.
An Alternative to the Peer Review Process
The internet provides an alternative to the peer review process. This process guarantees that new, revolutionary theories will not get published and therefore will not get a fair analysis.
In the past in order to get a new theory exposed to the world you first had to write a paper, submit it to a journal, and hope they publish it. If you don't have the correct credentials you'll be lucky to get past this point. Once published you wait for people to read it and then the discussion begins about it's validity.
With the internet this process can be completely bypassed. A person can publish their theory and within minutes thousands of people can be notified of it's existence and read it. Discussions can begin immediately and the theory can advance and evolve real-time. People from all over the world can chime in and add their knowledge.
The 'Mainstream' Internet
Big information sites on the Internet such as Wikipedia are heavily filtered and censored. Theories that go against accepted belief are labeled as pseudo-science or in the case of The Electric Universe they are banned entirely. Try it, go to Wikipedia and enter "Electric Universe" or "Wal Thornhill". This censorship slows the advancement of new ideas and is detrimental to Science.
A primary goal of this site is to allow opposing theories to co-exist where they can be discussed. We want to hear opposing points of view and expect to have heated arguments. Open minded discussions where contradictory ideas are discussed are vital to understanding and advancing our understanding. If a theory is correct it must be able to withstand scrutiny from others.
Rules of Conduct
The purpose of this site is to discuss and advance Scientific theories. I really want to keep people focused on that objective. This means flame wars, name calling, ad hominem attacks, and profanity will not be acceptable. Please read the rules of conduct for more information.
I truly value this post. I…
I truly value this post. I have been looking out everywhere for this! Give thanks heavens I discovered it on this web log. I really respect your work and that i request in I like to read your blog to get top studying on modern-day happenings. You have true writing capability and it makes the reader to examine your articles to an ever increasing extent. Thank you this type of remarkable amount for this exquisite post. Custom essay writing provider has less expensive and best first-rate papers.
Hello. I am Aunt Debbie…
Hello. I am Aunt Debbie. Heather's Aunt Debbie to be specific. I love science. O love it for all of it's exciting, exasperating, awesome adventure. I have a degree in renewable energy which includes many experiences that may be helpful to your group. I am an excellent proofreader and love to write essays. I also find research to be addictive, it's so interesting. So I'm offering my help to this worthy cause. Whatever you need, just let me know.
Do you have your 501c3?
Do you have your 501c3?
After a century of lies,…
After a century of lies, hubris, greed and theft, ours is the generation that is given the task of returning to honest scientific research and then cleaning up the mess. It isn’t fair. But I am happy it fell to us to do it, because I know that no other generation before or after will ever be as capable of doing it, and seeing it is done right.
I’m trying to get hold of…
I’m trying to get hold of Edwin Kaal..I met him some years ago in NL and he blew my mind, now I’m writing a book which has EUT themes and would like his opinion on a few ideas..anyone have any idea how I can contact him?
I would like to raise the…
I would like to raise the issue of so called 'nuclear weapons'. My research has indicated to me that this has been a gigantic psyop. (It also begs questions of the reality of the 'cold war' as well'.) It seems to me that the EU theory supplemented now by the SAM theory corroborates the falsity of explosive chain reactions and the release of large amounts of energy. (No H bomb furnace in the sun, cold fusion, different narrative to binding energy in the nucleus etc) When you first hear the notion that nukes are phony, the understandable reaction is to reject it out of hand. My fear is that the EU/SAM community might try and develop models to accommodate (impossible) nukes. (The EU group also seem to be too accepting IMO to what NASA claims - that's just something else to be mindful of.)
Psychic emotional charge separation cast out in props & personae
I have seen articles saying that the 'gadget' as it was called - on which no one seemed to know the whole until its demonstration - was not ready for Hiroshima and Nagasaki and that these were repurposed to the 'Atomic Weapon' as the 'thunderbolt' of a new god (Mythic ref). 66 (civilian) cities in Japan were firebombed and it is the result of this that is depicted and not the blast of an atomic bomb. (The plan to proceed war on Russia included the destruction of 66 cities). Extensive firebombing of German Cities (civilian and often avoiding military targets) was began early by the British perhaps to force Hitler to respond in like kind and thus quench any support for pacifist opposition or criticism to the war or its remit).
It may be that these weapons were later achieved, or it may be that terror symbols are the parameters of a consciousness guarded against exposure to a greater fear. In this respect I address the 'terraforming of Earth' as also terror-forming a subjective mind of sacrifice to objective emulation.
I am aware of other terror symbols that for some are a death sentence and for others a portal to new life.
That destruction on a massive scale is technological possible and periodically vented is not in question in terms of our physical frame of reference (lifetime).
That these may be a result of build up of charge instability within an ostensibly closed or rigid system of narrative control and continuity is looking beneath the personifications to charged relations. But in psychic-emotional terms, charge is generated by denial of Communication or Life Expression, that on persistent exclusion, is negatively polarised as if trying to get back in and repossess - when wholeness merely insinuates itself as a rebalancing that restores full Communication to the split of denying and denied. If Full Communication is associated with loss of charge and loss of power - self-possession or control, then very strong defences against allowing it into awareness are invoked.
I feel to expand on what is resonant and alive for me rather than divert into the bait of any psyop - but that of course may require waking to my own triggers or corresponding vibratory frequency to fearful manipulation.
resonance is not just an objectively observable phenomena - but inexplicably implicate - to play a little on David Bohm's terms.
I think about that charges a…
I think about that charges a lot. Initially they come from nuclear weapon using. There were nuclear bombing in Europa and Japan, not only Hiroshima and Nagasaki
Damn nice site. Just…
Damn nice site. Just registered for membership. I've put a link to you on my page, What's Wrong with Academia?, at https://treelight.com/essays/true-history/whats-wrong-with-academia/ (Note: There is a lot that is RIGHT with Academia. The page does not ignore its contribution to humanity, but at the same time it presents a list of areas in which (currently) dogma appears to have supplanted reason!)
hi, I think you should read…
hi, I think you should read this site. this site show real electric fields.
also please read my articles.
Quantum mechanics, theory of relativity, and Newton's universal gravitation are wrong.
History of science and philosophy lead to correct physics.
I was wondering what might…
I was wondering what might cause the nuclets to orient on only one side of the “backbone” of the nuclei of heavier elements. Is there evidence that suggests these configurations are more likely than a more compact orientation utilizing the entire surfaces of the backbone carbon nuclets?