But once a piece of the plan is in momentum
Now we’re getting somewhere. So not Gates, but “someone” (Fort Detrick?) created/spread the ‘rona, and not to forcibly vaccinate everyone, but for other nefarious reasons.
Care to enlighten us as to who this “someone” might be, and their reasons for doing it?
...Or spoon-feed the pabulum, as it were.
Vaccines certainly are the entire reason we are here today
Just to get this bit straight: You’re suggesting that Bill Gates (or someone) created/spread the ‘rona round so he can forcibly vaccinate everyone, right?
...You may well be a part of that 20%.
And Sam12 wonders why the only MD here decided to stop posting.
I guess it all depends on whether you apply an equal skepticism to the information sources you replace them with.
Display MoreWhat a coincidence!
322 new Covid cases in Mississippi!
322 new Covid cases in Kentucky!
322 new Covid cases in Mississippi!
322 new Covid cases in Armenia!
322 new Covid cases in Juarez!
322 new Covid cases in El Paso!
322 new Covid cases in Mexico City!
322 new Covid cases in Oaxaca!
322 new Covid cases in WISCONSIN!
322 new Covid deaths in DELAWARE
322 new Covid cases in Massachussetts
(thanks to J. Stone)
Interesting. No doubt as a fully paid-up member of the conspiracy theory club, you’ll be aware that 322 links back to Yale’s Skull and Bones club. Which almost certainly confirms some related dubious hypothesis, or something.
Or perhaps its just a restatement of the Birthday Paradox, as suggested by the fact those articles span over four months... And proven by the fact it works with other numbers too. Try googling “xxx new covid cases”...
Woodford's just another casualty then of Brexit economic lunacy. Nothing to do with IH or cold fusion.
Hardly... https://www.theguardian.com/bu…stment-genius-rarely-last
Most of those counts were generated in less than a second
That maybe, but you can't be certain of that from the data provided.
For purposes of calculating minimum supposed particle size, you have to take the average over the full 14160s
Well I calculate 5 picograms of Sr90 would emit 25 Becquerels*... And I'm going to guess a lump that small would easily float around in air.
*But then again, I had to look up the definition of a 'Becquerel', so your mileage may vary.
^ Well said.
I was just arguing that criticisms that have a vague sense of plausibility have an easier time making it through than primary claims that have a vague sense of plausibility.
Indeed, that's true. Point taken.
I merely suggest that 'sense of plausibility' is a subjective matter that could often be firmed up to a better, more objective level by the proposer of the counter argument.
And he repeatedly victimises me by always mentioning it. What an outrage.
PS. Calm it Smith, else you'll be back on the blocked list in a jiffy...
3) Key words...
You missed out "Moron", "Dummy", "ROTFWL", and "Perseverate" (the last of which demonstrates a complete lack of self-insight I feel...)
3) Rossi must have submitted "Non-disclosure" requests for these patent applications just like he did when he submitted "Fluid Heater." I'm not a patent attorney, but my understanding is that until he submits a request to have this undone, they will never be disclosed.
Only until it is granted, surely?
But I don't think the same standard applies. ...I just need to raise the specter
By that rationale, the theory stated below by Magicsound is just as valid as yours:
Some unknown person (whose initials could be E.W.) sneaked into the lab wearing an invisibility cloak (without opening the door of course). Then he compromised the experiment by touching the lead in front of the spectrometer with a refractory wand containing 90Sr, and left, again without opening the door.
When it come to these kind of supposed refutations, I think it is necessary to do more than just "raise the spectre". Otherwise we'd be here all day, slowly descending into a rabbit hole of weirdness.
For instance: Given the "signal" graph, (and knowledge of the scintillator programming) we can calculate the number of counts* received. Then, knowing the length of measurement 7, and the half-life of Strontium, we could calculate the minimum size and weight of this alleged free-floating particle... Which should give an understanding of whether it would actually float around the lab, or just fall to the floor.
It might not be completely conclusive, but at least it demonstrates that we are not just waving our hands and pulling rabbits from hats, as it were.
* Or is the 'count' axis just arbitrary? Either way, I'm sure you get my wider point.
TLDR summary: Lomax disagrees with Gluck, and he feels you need to know about it.
I just discovered that a user I'd blocked now has a hidden profile
One wonders what the point of blocking someone is, if you keep having to visit their profile to read what they wrote?
An odd behaviour that seems a bit self-defeating?
Surely IH would have included the invoices in the court bundle, if they had sent some.
Yugo's chickens will soon be coming home to roost.
When you understand that the energy is got by working out the area underneath each spike, you can see that you would expect more small spikes than large spikes and that this type of smooth spectrum is expected from almost any noise process subjected to the spectrometer counting algorithm.
Fair point.
from: https://terpconnect.umd.edu/~t…trum/SignalsAndNoise.html
Please explain how random electrical noise can be translated through the power supply into a classic Bremsstrahlung spectrum? I don't understand how this can be done.
Come on now Axil, there's no need to get bogged down with such petty details of reality when we are in the process of conjuring up "multi-headed hydras". (<link) You are becoming "unbalanced", as Mr Lewan might say...
That is clearly Mr Gates' signature (on the Texas doc). :hi:
Oh I'm sooooooooooo pleased you unblocked me. I don't care for your long-winded meta-anaylsis of my supposed "declarations" and you need to think about how my supposed declaration is modified by saying "I'm no patent lawyer... It seems to me".
Patents are licensed, not "technology", and the rest of your reply is just unnecessary prose. Are you bored?
Come to think of it, your response is actually just one big flatulent "declaration". You hypocrite. Block me again.
And tell me about it...
There is no useful data on Planet Rossi, though IH might disclose what doesn't work.
Abd, what IH got/tried to get was a licence to Rossi's patent(s)... I'm no patent lawyer but it seems to me that anyone boiling water with a heater containing H, Li & nano Ni (even at COP1) would be at risk of being sued by Leonardo.
Edit: or maybe LiAlH? It's been a while since I read the patent.
