Space cannon ? or really freak accident ?

Discussion in 'Conspiracies' started by ZMacZ, Sep 1, 2014.

1. ZMacZRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
123
Ur right...not mainland US...my mistake..

(although that 'borehole' in Florida was kinda unsettling..)

Messages:
18,742
No.

5. ZMacZRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
123
uh-uh...

One quick question...Dywy...do you believe in santa ?...(jokes..)

wait...

If you had a hack/decrypt proof way of sending military info on the Net....would you
leave it to chance to see whether or not it could be hacked/decrypted ?...
In my opinion..if it wouldn't stand up against the least amount of testing..would it be worth using ?
or even more so..investing in ?

I know one thing...THEY SURE WOULDN'T LIKE IT !!!

So yeah..I'd throw it into the wild and see if it lives...if it does..well..maybe it's worth it..

"...remember StarForce...."

Also..FYI...I'd be happy with it, you know if it is a space cannon...no more loss of friendly life...
just holes in the floor..but personally I'd use microwaves high intensity pulse...just a flash..
and some smoking boots...I think it would take less energy...and can be done much more
systematically...(no casualties of war..)

Last edited: Jan 31, 2015

7. ZMacZRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
123
Imagine this....

Several guys are not wanting to comply with the local 'regime'..and they are about to get executed..
Instead the space guns selectively fires at the hostiles...leaving smoking boots all around...

Now imagine those guys being executed thanking you big time for saving their a$$es, instead of their relatives cursing you for bombing them along with the 'regime'... I'd say a big win for local support at least, as well as less of a breeding ground for new 'regime'.. 8. ZMacZRegistered Senior Member Messages: 123 You wanna know the truth about such inventions ?...you gotta get them first... If you don't they'll beam ur a$$ instead....and yes I'm sorry to say so, but there it is....

I think it's quite needless to say that only one nation is allowed to have it...
That would be the first nation to achieve it...
(and there's more reasoning there but I don't wanna go into that...)
(lemme just say that I trust more in democrazy than any other form of government right now..)

Last edited: Jan 31, 2015
9. DywyddyrPenguinaciously duckalicious.Valued Senior Member

Messages:
18,742
Clearly you don't believe in facts and historical evidence.
(Nor supporting claims you've made: they do 'leak' stuff to see who can come up with a counter).

Yeah...
How long do you leave it to see if it can be beaten?
IF it doesn't get beaten in your assigned time frame then, when you start using it, the enemy already has a head start on breaking it.
As opposed to being hit with something completely new.
On the other hand if it does get beaten in your time frame then you're back to designing an improved version and repeating the cycle: in which case all you're doing is securing employment for people on designing weapons/ software that will never, ever get used.
Not real smart.

It's not.

Because you're clueless?

10. AlexGLike nailing Jello to a treeValued Senior Member

Messages:
4,304
If you break an enemies cipher, you DON'T tell them.

11. TBodilliaRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
159
Obviously not.

The Sicko News site makes no claim to anything but a sinkhole, no space cannons mentioned.

The pic Sicko News uses is of 2010 Guatemala City sinkhole not any Florida sinkhole.

You need to learn some science. A space base weapon to wipe out a single person? A raygun in space to kill your enemies??

It costs \$10,000 per pound to put something into low Earth orbit, which makes space cannons, kinetic bombardment, rods from gods a sci-fi fantasy.

12. ZMacZRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
123
ofc you don't...but if you use the right way of cyphering/crypting..you'd know they did...
(if a cypher/crypter would need two way verification for it to be decoded (sender/receiver end)..it would pop up as being decoded...
specially if that would mean the actual receiver wouldn't have been able to decrypt it anymore..
(key has one use..after that, it becomes useless..)

To Dywy...
and ofc..you see only what you think happens..I do believe in historical fact...but i also KNOW that history is way too many times written by the victor..
And usually bereft of the nastier parts for obvious reasons..

Ah..you'd rather use a top secret cypher of which you are not exactly sure it can't be hacked ?..RIGHT....SOO much smarter...

..yeah..I know..you got the wisdom of the world, and simply because it looks like something it's gotta be exactly that something you think it is..

yush..clueless...what exactly is clueless when it comes to maser technology ?..it can't be done or something ?....

in every case EVERY logician KNOWS FOR A FACT, that simply because something can't be
proven, does not make it either true or false...and the same goes for when something
can't be disproven...it's not proven false or true..

maser technology is a patented item..so..I'm 100% certain it's proven..therefore viable..
need a historical fact ?

Last edited: Feb 1, 2015
13. ZMacZRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
123
oh plz..if you have to use bombs..yes..it wouldn't be viable...(kinetic)...

But..a reusable high priority target energy weapon ?....well worth it...specially with annual budgets of government agencies and armed forces in the trillions...

With the average sortie from aircraft carriers and support could very well be worth several 100's
of thousands of dollars, each time such a weapon would be used would be a minus same amount of
new spending..so..economics of warfare 101...spend once..use forever..

Last edited: Feb 1, 2015
14. DywyddyrPenguinaciously duckalicious.Valued Senior Member

Messages:
18,742
Nope.

And your point here (assuming you have one) is...?

Well let's see: one example was the German Enigma.
THEY were sure it couldn't be hacked.
But it was.
And they were so convinced that it couldn't be hacked they arrested and executed large numbers of innocent individuals because they thought that they'd given secrets away.

So does this mean that you can't provide any support for your claim?

So what?
That doesn't mean it's a viable orbital weapon.

15. billvonValued Senior Member

Messages:
14,143
Here are a list of patents for perpetual energy devices. Think they are all viable? If so, order NOW!

• 1932. H. L. Worthington. 1,859,643 Magnetic Motor.
• 1934. J. W. Poysa. 1,963,213. Magnetic Motor.
• 1959. Norman L. Dean. 2,886,976. System for converting rotary motion into unidirectional motion.
• 1965. E. Baumgartner. 3,194,008. Positive Buoyancy Prime Mover.
• 1966. Dan K. McCoin. 3,292,365. Power conversion apparatus and method utilizing gravitational and buoyant forces.
• 1971. E. Rutkove. 3,625,089. Gravity Wheel Apparatus.
• 1976. David Diamond. 3,934,964. Gravity-Actuated Fluid Displacement Power Generator.
• 1978. Robert L. Cook. 4,238,968. Device for conversion of centrifugal force to linear force and motion.
• 1979. Howard R. Johnson. 4,151,431. Permanent Magnet Motor.
• 1980. Leslie R. Hinchman and Robert B. Hinchman. 4,184,409. Hydraulic Engine.
• Caldwell. 4,667,115. Energy machine generating hydraulic energy.
• 1989. Howard R. Johnson. 4,877,983 Magnetic Force Generating Method and Apparatus.
• 1988. Robert W. Willmouth. 4,818,232. Gravity and Power Driven Power Generators.
• James Harvey. 5,335,561. Impulse converter.
• 1995. Howard R. Johnson. 5,402,021. Magnetic Propulsion System.
• Michael Tarnoposky. 5,921,133. System and method of energy conversion of gravitation into mechanical energy by means of a sequence of impulses of force.
• 1999. Brad A. Forrest. 5,944,480. Buoyancy and Gravitation Motor. "...does not require an external power source, consume fuel or create a waste by-product."
• Paul T. Baskis et al. 6,109,123. Rotational inertia motor.
• 2002. James Woodward. 6,347,766. Method and apparatus for the generation of propulsive forces without the ejection of propellant. (Reactionless thruster.)
• 2002 Thomas Bearden. 6,362,718. Motionless electromagnetic generator. (This device extracts "compressed energy" from the time domain in amount mc2. It draws energy from the longitudinal electromagnetic waves that fill the ocean of space-time".) (!)
• 2003. Mikhail Tarnopolsky et al. 6,601,471. Main block of drop-power station.
• 2003. Fabrio Pinto. 6,651,167. Method for energy extraction. Describes and engine cycle comprising several state changes allowing for net gain of energy from an underlying field.
• 2004. Ralph E. Love. 6,694,844. Apparatus to recover energy through gravitational force.
• 2004. Ernest Eun Ho Shin. 6,734,574. Buoyancy-driven electric power generator.
• 2009. Paulo Emmanual De Abreu. 7,501,788. Quantum generator and related devices of energy production and conversion.

16. ZMacZRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
123
I'm not looking for perpetual energy SOURCES..they don't exist..
I don't need to look for perpetual motion..it exists already..inertia..in space..
(or an even bigger example..the Earth..going around teh sun for a billion years alerady, and still no need for a gas station..)

Why ? do I need to ? Do I have to build one first so youc an agree that something might or might not be ?

The absence of proof is not proof of absence..

What else ? nothing with conventionals woudl do, they need refills..so..that leaves only an energy based weapon..
And maser would be the best suited for it..

Yes there was a point, and it was right there..

In any case, i have my opinion, you have yours..idc..
It just gave me the idea on how to actually create such an effect..and that can still be usefull as an excavation tool on Mars..

- considers this subject moot (mostly)

17. KittamaruNever cruel nor cowardly...Staff Member

Messages:
13,869
Actually, the Earth rotation is slowing down due to a transfer of its rotational momentum to the Moon's orbital momentum - tidal friction.

The Earth's orbit around the Sun WOULD slow down due to much the same thing, but the radiation pressure from the sun acts to limit such a decay in orbit.