Painterman wrote:As for Thunderbolts, I looked in on them a few years ago and got turned off right away. For starters, they base many of their presentations on images from NASA's "deep space" probes (need I say more). Secondly, they go on fanciful digressions into New Agey woo woo - for example, their made-up grand history of the "solar system" based on "ancient mythology" which they also made up. For comparison, see the Zeitgeist film which tried a similar New Agey woo woo "ancient mythology" digression on 9/11 research.
Painterman wrote:As for Thunderbolts, I looked in on them a few years ago and got turned off right away. For starters, they base many of their presentations on images from NASA's "deep space" probes (need I say more). Secondly, they go on fanciful digressions into New Agey woo woo - for example, their made-up grand history of the "solar system" based on "ancient mythology" which they also made up.
I suspect Thunderbolts is a psyop designed to co-opt investigation into the electrical nature of whatever is out there beyond Earth's atmosphere.
The sheer volume of their output (given the slow pace of innovation in the subject) alone suggests this
On airless objects like moons and asteroids, sunlight ejects negatively charged electrons from matter, giving sunlit areas a strong positive electric charge. The solar wind is an electrically conducting gas called plasma where matter has been torn apart into electrons, which are relatively light, and positively charged ions, which are thousands of times more massive. While areas in sunlight can charge positive, areas in shadow get a strong negative charge when electrons in the solar wind rush in ahead of heavier ions to fill voids created as the solar wind flows by.
The surface of Earth is shielded from the direct effects of this activity by our planet's magnetic field, but airless objects without strong repelling magnetic fields, like small asteroids, have no protection from electrical activity in space.
The Moon has an external magnetic field that is very weak in comparison to that of the Earth.
"If an astronaut is tethered to a spacecraft that is in sunlight and positively charged, and touches a negatively charged asteroid surface in shadow, there could be an unexpected current flow between the two systems upon contact. We simply can't speculate on the nature of that current without this model."
"It is quite possible that electric fields induce a charge-up and subsequent discharge around a space vehicle, which could bring about serious damages to the human missions," Harada said.
NASA's Explorer series of probes and the Apollo missions were the first to reveal the perplexing lunar plasma environment, hinting that electrically driven dust may be a concern to robots and humans setting down on the moon.
"We've been to the surface before and survived just fine, but we did have a number of problems with dust, among other things. And we happened to be there during very quiet plasma conditions," said Jasper Halekas, a plasma physicist at the University of California, Berkeley.
"Certainly when you have big electric fields, you start to worry about damage to sensitive electronics, etc. And if those electric fields mobilize dust, that could become an additional problem." But, he said, "the truth is that we don't really know yet what relevance these kinds of studies may have for exploration. Probably the only way we will ever know for sure is to go back to the surface."
Apache wrote:The US went to the Moon 6 times yet failed to see any "electric field charge up and subsequent discharge"?
Painterman wrote:I wonder if Thunderbolts has even mentioned this glaring mismatch between the Apollo tales and their own theories?
The discoveries of the Apollo missions sparked debates and helped solidify new consensus theories about the Solar System’s history. In more recent years, many surprising discoveries have challenged scientists’ long held ideas about the moon’s history. Today, we begin exploring the evidence that high-energy electrical discharge events in the past have defined the lunar surface.
sharpstuff wrote:I think we need to be a little careful when discussing the Thunderbolts Project, seriously. One may fall into the trap of dismissing/denigrating the whole project. I personally think this is not a correct solution to finding answers.
I started this thread to get views on an electric/plasma universe because I believe that everything we sense is a manifestation of electrical (electro-magnetic...whatever they are) activity.
As for 'sysops' ( I can't stand that expression) I have no idea and do not care, quite frankly, it is not within my remit.
sharpstuff wrote:I think we need to be a little careful when discussing the Thunderbolts Project, seriously. One may fall into the trap of dismissing/denigrating the whole project. I personally think this is not a correct solution to finding answers.
sharpstuff wrote:I have learned a lot from the site and the videos, even Velikovski's works.
As for 'sysops' ( I can't stand that expression) I have no idea and do not care, quite frankly, it is not within my remit.
sharpstuff wrote:May we be a little more circumspect?
Return to Apollo, and more space hoaxes
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests