Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 104

Thread: Holding Back Technology - Magnets & Gravity.

  1. #1

    Holding Back Technology - Magnets & Gravity.

    Holding Back Technology - Magnets & Gravity.

    I have recently, Watched a video, on you tube.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VzwOFCSFms4

    Interesting Points.

    3-30 to 8-25
    &
    13-25 to 15-25

    Also interesting was a freeze frame with statment from Ben Rich.
    "We already have the means to travel among the stars, but these technologies are locked up in black projects and it would take an act of god to ever get them out to benifit humanity....Anything you can imagine we allready know how to do."

    This is from the former head of Lockheed Skunk works.

    I dont subscribe to the fact, that if it's on you tube, its fake.
    Fair enough, there is a lot of rubbish.

    Boyd Bushman is a Senior Research Engineer for Lockheed Martin, Texas Instruments and Hughes Aircraft.
    He is regarded as one of the inventors of the Stinger missile.

    After the life he has had, would he be looking to become "the next big thing in Ufology".

    Dosent look like he is after a public "rock star" style life, like maybe Lazzar.

    "Nature never uses english, it dos'ent speak, it dos'ent use any language, yet, it is talking to us all the time."

    Great attitude for a Research Engineer to start with.

    My Point,

    Has Technology been held back, yes, These two guys prove that.
    Even if the video experiments are crude, they are proof.

    Basically where is my Hover Car & my Anti-Grav Boots?

    Seriously, why arent these Technology's attached to anything that use's fuel for propulsion,
    it seems obvious that a vehicle, Whether earth based or space based, would benifit from being lighter.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    4,167
    Has Technology been held back, yes, These two guys prove that.
    No, they just claim it. No proof, just argument by claimed authority. It is basically down to you to assess whether you believe them. I don't.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Perthshire, UK
    Posts
    147
    My first reaction is that if this is top secret, US military, black ops information, which has been suppressed for decades, why are they allowing it to be publicised on YouTube? It would be very easy to have this, and similar videos, removed, but "UFO TV" seems immune to prosecution.

    Looking for information on this supposed "engineer" only turns up UFO and conspiracy web sites, and one highly disputed Wikipedia entry with no supporting references. "Boyd Bushman" may indeed exist, and may have worked as an engineer for Lockheed Martin, but we have no way of knowing if this is in fact him in the video. Some of the things he says make me doubt whether he has any scientific background at all, and he may just be a good performer with a poor script.

    The experiment he describes, claiming that an object consisting of two opposing magnets forced together falls more slowly than any other non-magentic object should be very easy to reproduce, and would, if true, be a major discovery. So why has nobody else apparently noticed this effect (given that people do like to play with magnets)? Why hasn't this work been repeated and reported in reputable journals?

    I'd put this down as yet another pseudo-science fake, and since UFO TV are in the business of selling DVDs of their little shows, I can guess the reasons behind it...
    Days spent at sea are not deducted from one's alloted span...
    (Phoenician proverb)

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    12,994
    Quote Originally Posted by The Killchain View Post
    Seriously, why arent these Technology's attached to anything that use's fuel for propulsion,
    it seems obvious that a vehicle...
    Well, seriously...because there is no credible evidence that these "technologies" actually exist.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    a long way away
    Posts
    8,524
    Quote Originally Posted by molesworth View Post
    My first reaction is that if this is top secret, US military, black ops information, which has been suppressed for decades, why are they allowing it to be publicised on YouTube?
    Quite. Now the "secret" is out, why aren't manufacturers using it?

    Or could it be ... that this technology doesn't exist after all?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Depew, NY
    Posts
    6,525
    I think that we have had two viable spacecraft types that could journey to the stars. Orion and a couple small scale ion ships. So I don't see how anything is really hidden by any government, since these are fairly well known.

    Orion has the problem of needing to be built in orbit then fuelled with nuclear bombs. Ion drives have the problem of being super slow and only used in small scale ships. Orion has the problem of not being tested at all.

    Assuming we could do these today, they would never make it to even the closest stars in a single human lifetime (from the perspective of a 40 year old anyway). Add in the fact that we don't really have the support systems for such a long duration ship, neither would work.

    We should try an unmanned mission for other stars, but I can't say I could see investors lining up for it. On the other hand, perhaps short duration manned cruises to test and improve the technology would be a better use of resources.
    Solfe

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "Triangles are my favorite shape
    "Three points where two lines meet"
    Tessellate, Alt-J

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    810
    Quote Originally Posted by The Killchain View Post
    I dont subscribe to the fact, that if it's on you tube, its fake.
    Fair enough, there is a lot of rubbish.
    So you acknowledge that much of it is rubbish, and yet your entire post seems to based on the information from that video. I see no evidence that you have researched it beyond that. Here's a small hint - try to find information about his supposed court case against Lockheed Martin - see how may times it is referenced outside conspiracy sites. And note the dates - see if you can find anything recent or about the outcome...

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    639
    Quote Originally Posted by Solfe View Post
    I think that we have had two viable spacecraft types that could journey to the stars. Orion and a couple small scale ion ships. So I don't see how anything is really hidden by any government, since these are fairly well known.

    Orion has the problem of needing to be built in orbit then fuelled with nuclear bombs. Ion drives have the problem of being super slow and only used in small scale ships. Orion has the problem of not being tested at all.

    Assuming we could do these today, they would never make it to even the closest stars in a single human lifetime (from the perspective of a 40 year old anyway). Add in the fact that we don't really have the support systems for such a long duration ship, neither would work.

    We should try an unmanned mission for other stars, but I can't say I could see investors lining up for it. On the other hand, perhaps short duration manned cruises to test and improve the technology would be a better use of resources.
    Both the spacecraft types you mention are still only designed for interplanetary journeys within the solar system, and Orion is currently only planned as an ISS visitor and then possibly further missions to the Moon. I don't think it is even currently perceived as a manned Mars vehicle (.... although I may be wrong?)

    Ion drive craft are so far only for quite small unmanned scientific probe type vehicles, and would take many months or even years just to reach the gas giants and associated interesting moons within our solar system.

    Any craft we can build given current technology is going to take many many lifetimes to reach even the nearest stars, I think 10000 or even as much as 100000 years (the numbers escape me right now).

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    191
    Quote Originally Posted by Skyfire View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Solfe View Post
    I think that we have had two viable spacecraft types that could journey to the stars. Orion and [...]
    Orion is currently only planned as an ISS visitor and then possibly further missions to the Moon.
    The confusion here is between Project Orion and the Orion capsule.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    4,362
    Quote Originally Posted by Skyfire View Post
    and Orion is currently only planned as an ISS visitor
    A different Orion is meant, project orion was a proposed nuclear pulse ship capable of interstellar travel with current technology.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    17,148
    Quote Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
    A different Orion is meant, project orion was a proposed nuclear pulse ship capable of interstellar travel with current technology.

    . . . depending on what you mean by "interstellar travel." If you mean *useful* interstellar travel, nuke-bomb Orion isn't sufficient.

    "The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." Abraham Lincoln

    I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

    The Leif Ericson Cruiser

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    4,362
    Quote Originally Posted by Van Rijn View Post
    . . . depending on what you mean by "interstellar travel." If you mean *useful* interstellar travel, nuke-bomb Orion isn't sufficient.
    depending on what you mean by "useful"

    I'd suggest "capable of interstellar travel" to mean "able to reach another star within a human lifetime" (which seems to be the conventional goal for these conceptual designs), which Orion can.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    12,994
    Quote Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
    ...which Orion can.
    Really?...you seem to think this untested technology is certain to "work"....and you simply do not have sufficient evidence to make such a statement.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    17,148
    Quote Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
    depending on what you mean by "useful"

    I'd suggest "capable of interstellar travel" to mean "able to reach another star within a human lifetime" (which seems to be the conventional goal for these conceptual designs), which Orion can.
    No, that has not been demonstrated to be feasible with nuke-bomb Orion. But this is probably off-topic . . . if you want to discuss it further, probably best to continue someplace else.

    "The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." Abraham Lincoln

    I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

    The Leif Ericson Cruiser

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    17,148
    Quote Originally Posted by The Killchain View Post
    Boyd Bushman is a Senior Research Engineer for Lockheed Martin, Texas Instruments and Hughes Aircraft.
    He is regarded as one of the inventors of the Stinger missile.

    After the life he has had, would he be looking to become "the next big thing in Ufology".
    Boyd Bushman has come up before here. I remember once where he was talking positively about Hutchison videos that are about the silliest thing you can imagine (like upside down camera tricks, so things appear to fall up).

    What evidence does Boyd Bushman have, not his words, not a YouTube video claim, but actual evidence?

    "The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." Abraham Lincoln

    I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

    The Leif Ericson Cruiser

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    4,362
    Quote Originally Posted by R.A.F. View Post
    Really?...you seem to think this untested technology is certain to "work"....and you simply do not have sufficient evidence to make such a statement.
    I never said it is "certain to work", i even specified it as a "conceptual design".
    You have quoted slightly out of context, the point was to formalize the notion of "capable of interstellar travel", the snippet you quoted meaning that Orion (as a conceptual design) falls within the suggested parameters for "capable of interstellar travel", not meaning that it is "certain to work".

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    4,362
    Quote Originally Posted by Van Rijn View Post
    No, that has not been demonstrated to be feasible with nuke-bomb Orion. But this is probably off-topic . . . if you want to discuss it further, probably best to continue someplace else.
    Sure, i have started another thread in S&T here

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    12,994
    Quote Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
    You have quoted slightly out of context...
    You should not have used the phrase "which Orion can" to describe an untested technology, that's all.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    4,362
    Quote Originally Posted by R.A.F. View Post
    You should not have used the phrase "which Orion can" to describe an untested technology, that's all.
    Fair enough.

  20. #20
    Yep,

    All good points about Evidence.

    The Demonstration, with Two tubes, one copper & one Steel & a magnet.
    Seems Rag Tag, but it felt like when your in a classroom, the teacher is trying to get a point across, off a bigger principal, then gets a simple rag tag experiment that everybody can do, to get you thinking.

    IF the rag tag experiment is true, i think its quite possible that research has been/being done, but no application to real world.
    That is my tecnology being held back angle.

    The Magnets changing mass on moving objects, That must be Checkable, i am going to try this week, (looking at a pair of huge PA speakers, tapping a screwdriver, Largest magnets i can find, for free.)

    I can see this not working out, othrwise many people would be doing it.
    Then again, if its right, im straping it to my motorcycle and checking petrol usage...

    I must remember not to post results on you tube, or any other site, as they can all be fabricated.
    Then you are open to riddicule, Pseudo Science and all the other background checks, in order to discredit.
    Not a nice working enviroment.
    It is easy to shoot the messenger, very easy when you talk about UFO's and "Weird" things.

    A look at this page, dosent prove who he is, but its a start.
    http://www.patentgenius.com/invented...isvilleTX.html

    And the phone numbers are easy to access on Lockheed Martins site, for employe's records...etc.
    Looks "Happy to help".

    If a person say's 10 crazy thing's and 2 turn out true, do you discredit everything.
    or do you look at the other 8 again.....just to make shure.

    Perhaps the focus should be on the data, not the apperance or background of the delivery method.

    My held back point is, where is the data, or the dubunking data for that point.......

    Hutchison
    Is it not possible for a Slightly scruffy, Hippie type to come up with "somthing" in his garage.....
    Would'nt like to say, No.

    Wright bros
    After their Kitty Hawk success, The Wrights flew their machine in open fields next to a busy rail line in Dayton Ohio for almost an entire year. American authorities refused to come to the demos, and Scientific American Magazine published stories about "The Lying Brothers." Even the local Dayton newspapers never sent a reporter (but they did complain about all the letters they were receiving from local "crazies" who reported the many flights.) Finally the Wrights packed up and moved to Europe, where they caused an overnight sensation and sold aircraft contracts to France, Germany, Britain, etc.

    Just an example.
    There are many more.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    291
    For every Wright Brothers, there are 1,000 Wrong Brothers (okay, they don't have to be brothers.) "They laughed at Columbus" is no defense against "they" laughing at the guy with the perpetual motion machine.

    I would also point out that if I were to post an episode of The Simpsons on YouTube, 20th Century Fox would have it taken down within days, if not hours. Yet somehow the all knowing, all seeing secret government can't manage to disappear a video that blows the whistle on their whole operation.

    Some people have come on here before claiming first-hand knowledge of the most amazing government coverups of secret technology or alien visitors, sometimes declaring that their life is in danger. And I ask them, in all seriousness, "Why aren't you dead?" If there is a huge secret government that coincidentally acts just like secret governments do in the movies, the person making the claim should have been tracked down about 20 seconds after making their revelation, and either a "cleaner" dispatched to settle the issue or some sort of pseudo-SWAT team choppered in to remove the target to the secret prison BENEATH Guantanamo Bay.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    12,994
    Quote Originally Posted by The Killchain View Post
    My held back point is, where is the data, or the dubunking data for that point.......
    That's not the way it "works'. Those making the claim bear the burden of proof...in other words, we don't have to prove an idea wrong, the proponents of the idea have to prove it right.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    12,994
    Quote Originally Posted by The Killchain View Post
    Perhaps the focus should be on the data, not the apperance or background of the delivery method.
    Problem with that is the so called "data" tends to evaporate upon closer examination...almost as if it never existed in the first place.


    Just an example. There are many more.

    More "examples" of what??
    Last edited by R.A.F.; 2012-Jan-22 at 05:16 PM. Reason: added "almost as if..."

  24. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by R.A.F. View Post
    More "examples" of what??
    People being riddiculed for discovery.....

    Top US science mag, calls them liar bros, discredited for a year....etc.

    Shame all that energy went into discrediting them.
    Imagine dedicating that energy in to helping them.

    Ironicaly US "fly" to moon in same century....

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    12,994
    Quote Originally Posted by The Killchain View Post
    People being riddiculed for discovery.....
    So what? You have the overwhelming advantage of hindsight. You can pick and choose which of those "ridiculed" ideas actually turned out to be valid.

    There are many more examples of people being ridiculed for good reason than there are people being ridiculed, who turned out to be right.

    In other words, your "sampling" is biased, and cannot be used as a "tool" for determining what future discoveries will turn out to be valid.

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Perthshire, UK
    Posts
    147
    Quote Originally Posted by The Killchain View Post
    The Demonstration, with Two tubes, one copper & one Steel & a magnet.
    Seems Rag Tag, but it felt like when your in a classroom, the teacher is trying to get a point across, off a bigger principal, then gets a simple rag tag experiment that everybody can do, to get you thinking.
    To me, this demonstrates that the person in the video is probably not who he claims to be, and probably not an engineer.

    It's a well-known "trick" using eddy currents in the copper, which has been known about for a long time, and frequently demonstrated at kids science events, on TV science shows etc. I'm surprised they openly show it as "proof" of something unusual, when it's so well known.

    And why does he feel the need to create a "new" fundamental force of magnetism, when it's already covered in "electromagnetism"?

    Quote Originally Posted by The Killchain View Post
    The Magnets changing mass on moving objects, That must be Checkable, i am going to try this week, (looking at a pair of huge PA speakers, tapping a screwdriver, Largest magnets i can find, for free.)

    I can see this not working out, othrwise many people would be doing it.
    Then again, if its right, im straping it to my motorcycle and checking petrol usage...
    Good luck with that...
    Days spent at sea are not deducted from one's alloted span...
    (Phoenician proverb)

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Perthshire, UK
    Posts
    147
    Having watched more of the video on YouTube, I'm even more surprised at some of the things said and shown :-

    . Strange claims about the binomial expansion of E = MC^2.

    . Apparently Apophis is definitely going to collide with the earth in 2036 "somewhere between Siberia and Africa" (although the scale of the impact is unkown because we don't know its velocity).

    . More demonstrations of eddy current effects using aluminium, which, apparently has some "mystical" properties, since "you can't run current through aluminium" because "it's non-conductive".

    I'm not going to watch any more for fear my brain may melt...
    Days spent at sea are not deducted from one's alloted span...
    (Phoenician proverb)

  28. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by molesworth View Post
    Good luck with that...
    Ha....

    Its my next excuse for popping whelies down the bypass.....

    Research officer.....

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    12,994
    Quote Originally Posted by molesworth View Post
    I'm not going to watch any more for fear my brain may melt...
    I didn't watch it for just that reason, so thanks for "taking one for the team".


    . Apparently Apophis is definitely going to collide with the earth in 2036 "somewhere between Siberia and Africa" (although the scale of the impact is unkown because we don't know its velocity)
    That is way beyond ridiculous...we can't even "pin point" the impact location of de-orbiting Earth satellites, and they expect us to believe this "garbage"?

    I agree...ha, ha...it is to laugh...
    Last edited by R.A.F.; 2012-Jan-22 at 07:38 PM. Reason: fixed coding

  30. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by molesworth View Post
    Having watched more of the video on YouTube, I'm even more surprised at some of the things said and shown :-

    . Strange claims about the binomial expansion of E = MC^2.

    . Apparently Apophis is definitely going to collide with the earth in 2036 "somewhere between Siberia and Africa" (although the scale of the impact is unkown because we don't know its velocity).

    . More demonstrations of eddy current effects using aluminium, which, apparently has some "mystical" properties, since "you can't run current through aluminium" because "it's non-conductive".

    I'm not going to watch any more for fear my brain may melt...
    I know what you mean,

    its good being able to ask these questions.
    (the original one at the top).

    And get pointed in the right direction, by people that have looked at this material before.

    No comments on the Patent link.....thought that might have been relavant.

    But patents are made for all sorts of strange items.....by all sorts of people...

    Cheers for all answers on subject.

Similar Threads

  1. Anti-Gravity Treadmill Developed from NASA Technology
    By Fraser in forum Universe Today
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 2009-Nov-18, 09:10 PM
  2. Holding on to an atmosphere
    By MrFRjr in forum Astronomy Cast
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 2008-Jun-06, 06:14 PM
  3. Will Anti-Gravity technology ever exist?
    By nixter in forum Against the Mainstream
    Replies: 81
    Last Post: 2008-Feb-24, 11:32 PM
  4. UK and Australia after our anti-gravity technology!
    By Rodina in forum Conspiracy Theories
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 2003-Feb-01, 07:11 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
here
The forum is sponsored in-part by: