| |
|
Article: <5dcq4r$5qa@dfw-ixnews4.ix.netcom.com>
From: saquo@ix.netcom.com(Nancy )
Subject: Re: GRAVITY - the Zetas Explain
Date: 6 Feb 1997 14:34:03 GMT
In article <5d2bj2$i5f@pollux.cmc.doe.ca> Greg Neill
writes:
> Nancy (saquo@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
>> (Begin ZetaTalk[TM])
>> you cannot EXPLAIN auroras adequately. You've INVENTED
>> a light ray source to support your theory, which is an
invention!
>> (End ZetaTalk[TM])
>
> what you claim is an invented source of light is in fact a
> discovered one. Atoms emit light when energetically
> stimulated.
> ynecgan@cmc.doe.ca (Greg Neill)
(Begin ZetaTalk[TM])
Greg, take your experiments out of their protected and enclosed
little boxes and put them into the atmosphere. Do they still
work? No! Please describe what you're talking about then you say
"energetically stimulated". Stimulated by what? What is
stimulated by the first what?
(End ZetaTalk[TM])
In article <5d2bj2$i5f@pollux.cmc.doe.ca> Greg Neill
writes:
>>>> Whatever you, your human eye, "sees"
is what the brain
>>>> chooses to register. You "see" what is
in the majority,
>>>> the pattern that overwhelms, and during normal
sunlight
>>>> displays, THIS is what overwhelms!
>>>
>>> I would contest this with the simple fact that
cameras,
>>> photocells, CCDs, and a plethora of other light
detectors
>>> have no 'brain' to perform your alleged 'filtering',
yet they
>>> confirm the effects witnessed by eye.
>>> ynecgan@cmc.doe.ca (Greg Neill)
>>
>> (Begin ZetaTalk[TM])
>> Are you under the illusion that your cameras see
EVERYTHING
>> that exists? You have designed these devices to register
what
>> YOU can see.
>
> Devices have been designed to register *more* than what the
> eye sees. That's the point of things like sensitive CCD
detectors,
> IR film, ultraviolet detectors, x-ray detectors, radios,
etc.
> ynecgan@cmc.doe.ca (Greg Neill)
(Begin ZetaTalk[TM])
We're wearing down in this conversation because you're not
willing to admit that humans DO NOT KNOW for sure what causes
auroras, and most certainly you're not willing to admit that our
explanation it better than the current popular human explanation.
The only relevance cameras have to the aurora subject is your
claim that as they can record an aurora then magnetism must be
involved! It's not involved! Cameras are designed to record light
in the spectrum your eye can see. Your eye records light, and the
camera records light. So? What do x-ray devices or radios have to
do with auroras? You've digressed here in an attempt to avoid
admitting that we're right and you're wrong.
(End ZetaTalk[TM])