Unfortunately, there seems to be big problems with us all switching to renewable-powered cars. For starters, we'd have to build a whole load of new cars and scrap the existing ones. Secondly, if they were battery-powered, we'd have to make a lot of batteries, which aren't environmentally friendly. We might instead try to use hydrogen-powered cars but if we did that, we'd have to construct hydrogen storage tanks and pumps at all our petrol stations… or at least, that's the commonly held belief. But what if we could simply convert normal, gasoline or petrol-powered cars to run on hydrogen? That is the subject of the following video. It has an annoyingly deceptive title, 'car that runs on water' when in fact it runs on hydrogen created from water using electrolysis, but it's still well worth watching.
The video stars Bob Lazar. He came to fame in UFO circles after talking openly about his work at Area 51, and his experiences working on 'flying saucers' or UFOs. People in the UFO community are divided about Bob's testimony. Some think it is correct and others think he is supply false testimony, to confuse and discredit the whole subject. My personal feeling, over the years, is that Bob is a clever, sincere and brave man, but I am sceptical that some of the information he has passed on is correct, not through his own duplicity, but because he was fed false information by people at Area 51. Lazar's reported description of element 115 and its use in advanced anti-gravity ships is, I think, a complete red-herring. It has been created to disguise the fact, as explained by Eric Laithwaite, Nikola Tesla, Paul LaViolette, Thomas Townsend-Brown, John Searle and others, that charge distribution and circular motion in a metal body is enough to generate a gravitational effect. The theoretical underpinning for this phenomenon is described in Dr LaViolette's book, sub quantum kinetics.
This 'create confusion' tactic was were developed in the Second World War by the Allies, and probably earlier. More recently, it has been used in the matter of UFOs, aliens, exotic technology etc. Back in the 1940's, those wartime classified departments realised that just hiding something was too simple an approach. Instead, it was better to hide important material but also to create false material. In this way, any investigators searching for the truth would think they'd found something.They'd finish their work, satisfied, but in fact they'd been duped and they were actually worse off than before.
Returning to the matter of adapting a car to run on hydrogen, Bob Lazar shows that this isn't a difficult process. He has already adapted his Corvette to run on hydrogen, which he creates overnight with an electrolysis unit using mains water and a solar-power array. Unfortunately, there's a catch; Bob explains in the video that a special hydride, a chemical, is needed in the storage process. This hydride has been marked classified by the U.S. government and can't be bought. Lazar got around this problem by making the hydride himself.
How accurate are Lazar's claims? Is it practically achievable to alter a car to run on hydrogen? I don't know but it's definitely worth investigating. This is the first time I've heard of someone adapting a normal, petrol or gasoline-powered car to run on hydrogen but, in principle, it should be do-able. A car's engine is simply a metal case containing set of cavities in which a fuel is burnt. The expansion of the gases created by the burning pushes a piston around, thereby turning the car's wheels. Hydrogen should work just as well as petrol, as they're both chemicals being oxidised. I can imagine all sorts of technical issues but in principle, it's a sound idea.
The idea of adapting existing cars to run on hydrogen is brilliant from a climate-change and environmental perspective. We don't have to trash all our existing cars and we still get clean cars that can run on renewable power. I can see that the major car manufacturers wouldn't be very interested in this, as no one's buying a new car. Also, the safety people might have a lot to say about a car that's had hydrogen tanks fitted to it, but I would say that's better that staying with fossil fuels, which are destroying our planet's climate, polluting our cities and will eventually decimate the human race. Hopefully, we'll hear more on this subject soon.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We examined published reports of increased stress protein levels and DNA strand breaks due to EMF interactions, both of which are indicative of DNA damage. We also considered antenna properties such as electronic conduction within DNA and its compact structure in the nucleus.
RESULTS: EMF interactions with DNA are similar over a range of non-ionising frequencies, i.e., extremely low frequency (ELF) and radio frequency (RF) ranges. There are similar effects in the ionising range, but the reactions are more complex.
CONCLUSIONS: The wide frequency range of interaction with EMF is the functional characteristic of a fractal antenna, and DNA appears to possess the two structural characteristics of fractal antennas, electronic conduction and self symmetry. These properties contribute to greater reactivity of DNA with EMF in the environment, and the DNA damage could account for increases in cancer epidemiology, as well as variations in the rate of chemical evolution in early geologic history.
In other words, the researchers found that DNA is a lot like a radio antenna, in that it can pick up electromagnetic signals, which then alter its behaviour. What’s more, DNA also has loops within loops, which means it can pick up electromagnetic signals in multiple frequencies.
There are many thought-provoking potential consequences to our DNA being fractal antennae. For starters, as the above paper mentions, there are ‘published reports of increased stress protein levels and DNA strand breaks due to EMF interactions, both of which are indicative of DNA damage.’ In other words, there’s evidence that our DNA is very sensitive to e/m signals and will actually suffer damage if the wrong signals are beamed at it. There is an awful lot of radio-frequency traffic in our world today, particular from wireless or phone masts, and there’s evidence that it’s not good for biological organisms, as this science paper states. To be honest, the logical thing to do would be to develop a full understanding of radio-frequency signals on the DNA of living creatures first, and then stick up masts everywhere, but that’s clearly not happening.
There is another thought-provoking consequence to the above paper, something that no one has talked about yet, as far as I know. According to the science paper mentioned at the beginning of this article, DNA is surprisingly good at picking up RF and ELF signals and then altering its own functioning as a result. Not surprisingly, hitting DNA with crude or random RF signals of high intensity will trigger damage within the DNA. This is a lot like hitting a set of skilfully arrange tuning forks with very loud notes of random frequency. A lot of the time nothing will happen and some of the time a fork will overload and smash to bits.
But what if we knew exactly what RF signals to send? If that was the case, we could beam a host of carefully chosen RF signals at the DNA and it wouldn’t just do nothing, or break. Would it instead play like a musical instrument? Would it alter its genetic information in a specific way? Would it produce specific proteins, neurotransmitters or perhaps even viruses? Read More...
You Can’t Tell the People is a big book and there were several times when I skimmed pages. Bruni is very thorough in her investigation and clearly talks to many of the key players many times as she gathers the relevant evidence. It’s easy to lose count of the number of senior military, police and civilian figures she talks to. Eventually, it becomes obvious that certain things happened in Rendlesham Forest on the last week of 1980: Read More...
The net effect of such a strategy would be that the greater the media exposure of a controversial theory, the more likely that it's wrong. This situation also creates a sad side-effect; intelligent readers who only look at the most well-known theories will rapidly see that they're false and conclude the whole area is bunk, when in fact important and correct theories do exist, they're just being ignored and/or suppressed.
If the above relationship between charge and gravity is correct, then it would it explain why stars orbit the centre of galaxies faster than they should (they are highly charged objects) and there would be no need for the dark matter that civilian scientists believe exists but cannot find. It would also mean that we could construct craft that could easily take us to other planets and other stars. Our era of using ludicrously primitive chemical rockets would be over. It would also mean, theoretically, that other races from all those planets around all those stars could easily visit us, once they'd developed this technology.
Many people might think that if gravity is all about positive and negative charge, we'd all have anti-gravity saucer craft by now. There are good reasons why our civilians scientists would not be getting the chance to give us craft that make petrol-guzzling machines obsolete. I'll leave the details of that for now. Nevertheless, if gravity and charge are linked, then a lot of aliens should be visiting our planet. This is a powerful piece of information and since 'knowledge itself is power', to quote the brilliant scientist and diplomat Sir Francis Bacon, it's hardly surprising us ordinary folks are being kept away from it.
When it comes to reports of aliens visiting us, a lot of us will immediately think about stories such as 'the glowing light got me and then I woke up on a laboratory table and these evil looking greys were experimenting on me and they shoved something in my brain and in my eye and left me by the side of the road!' This sort of event may certainly happen; it's certainly the idea promoted in entertainment like the 'X' files, but it can't be the only way humans could interact with aliens. If aliens are visiting our planet, some of them would logically be nice individuals. Any other view smacks of hysterical paranoia.
So, logically, if all the above elements are correct, then there should be accounts of nice alien visits. Fortunately, there are and here's one to watch. Steve Boucher comes across as a genuine, peaceful, honest guy. He might be lying all the way through the interview but his non-verbal behaviour, his speech patterns and his demeanour all point to him being entirely sincere (as far as I can tell). His account is believable, fascinating and at times, very funny. Definitely recommended.
Here's the follow up interview with Q&A:
Dr Laviolette is qualified and experienced as a physicist and engineer and shows it with his in-depth descriptions in the book of sub-quantum kinetics, an alternative theoretical description of the fundamental behaviour of reality. On the science direct website, there is an article by Laviolette describing this theory, entitled 'The Cosmic Ether: Introduction to Subquantum Kinetics'. The abstract reads:Read More...
This, I think, is a big problem with people; if you talk to someone about something that's outside their comfort zone, their 'sphere of expectation', more likely than not, they'll think you're mad. Bertrand Russell was wise in saying; “do not fear to be eccentric in opinion, for every opinion now accepted was once eccentric.” Unfortunately, it won't stop you getting locked up.
Timothy Good has explained in many books, there is an enormous amount of evidence all around our planet of human encounters with UFOs. It's certainly true that many of those encounters have little physical evidence and rely for a large part on eye-witness testimony. Such reports can therefore be dismissed as too thin for serious analysis, but there are also a very large number of reports that have many respectable witnesses and a host of supporting evidence, for example the UFO encounter in Rendlesham Forest. It is also clear that military forces around the world are grabbing as much of the physical evidence as they can and censoring reports before they reach the mainstream media. This is especially true of the United States military who have soldiers in more than 150 countries around the world (considering there are only officially 196 countries in total, this is a huge slice). If we also consider the simple fact that most Western media outlets will not publish anything that is marked classified, for sensible reasons, It is hardly surprising that if the U.S. military decides to put a lid on the UFO phenomena, it would become a fringe and murky subject. Read More...
1) Assume that UFOs are real devices but are not defying the laws of physics, that they are functioning machines, albeit advanced ones.
2) Collate observations on UFOs, especially observations carried out by skilled personnel, such as military observers and engineers.
3) Use the collated information to identify patterns of behaviour by the UFOs, their emissions (radiation etc), their weight (ground imprints) and any and all factual evidence that can be used to deduce the mode of their operation.
By doing this, Paul Hill came up with fascinating and scientifically sound possibilities as to how the UFOs operate and whether or not it is feasible for those craft to have come from planets around other stars. Read More...
Fortunately, there are some people who are interested in the field of UFOs, mind over matter, spirits and other officially 'crank' topics, who do have a solid scientific understanding. One of them is Dr Tom Valone. Below is a talk he gave at the X-Conference a few years back on the subject of advanced propulsion systems, UFOs and what their flight behaviour (as far as can be observed) may be telling us about what is possible in terms of interstellar transportation.
During the talk, Dr Valone touches on a physics matter that has intrigued me for many years. He explains that the perceived ability of some unidentified flying craft to execute high-speed, right-angle turns indicates that their designers have developed technology that reduces or negates inertial mass. Dr Valone points out in his talk that it may be possible to reduce inertial mass by creating a very-high-voltage electromagnetic environment. Traditionally, inertial mass and gravitational mass for an object are assumed to always stay the same - this is known as the Equivalence Principle - but this assumption may be flawed. In certain exotic systems, involving high voltages, the inertial mass, possibly created by the object's interaction with the vacuum energy field, could be reduced.
Interestingly, I explored this possibility in an article a few years ago but not with regard to UFOs. Instead, I postulated that stars, being high-voltage, high-pressure, high-temperature plasma balls, may have a much lower inertial mass than their gravitational mass. This would explain why stars orbit the centres of their galaxies much faster than they should, a phenomenon that has caused mainstream physics to conclude that the universe is full of dark matter. I'll try and mention this interesting idea to Dr Valone; he may find it fascinating! :-)
Isn't it fascinating? What is that device? I have no idea but it does seem to possess an ability to hover and move through the air without any need for wings or rockets or a jet engine or propellers even a gas bag. In a sense, it's the best UFO I've ever seen footage evidence for because it is completely alien. No one would come up with such a flying device. This sort of encounter I think shows why it's so hard to be a responsible science-fiction writer, because there seems to be advanced stuff out there that makes no sense at all, so how can one write believably about it? I think I'll stick to writing stories about people in metal boxes; it's so much easier.
In his book, Corso discusses, at length, the U.S. military's interest and plans in setting up a moon base, a plan hatched in the late fifties and designed to be completed by the mid-sixties. Corso makes it clear that General Trudeau, his commanding officer, was involved in a plan to land on the moon and then establish a base there, with the moon landing being simply one step in a larger process. The reasoning laid out in Corso's book is more extensive than my comments in my article, which not surprisingly for a major U.S. military project, but the essential premise is the same. The moon is the high ground and anyone who establishes a base on it will have a huge military advantage. Corso dedicates an entire chapter to the project and adds an appendix with photocopied briefing documents, detailing what became known as Project Horizon. But, as we all know, there is no moon base. Corso explains why; his answer is logical but it involves UFO's, so its veracity is a matter for debate. Read More...
Let's be logical
Corso' book is certainly official 'kook' territory but, before judging and sentencing it, let’s think rationally about the likelihood of its key assertions. Firstly, it's become clear to all of us in recent years that the intelligence agencies and militaries of the world are definitely hiding things from their citizens. After Edward Snowden’s recent revelations about the N.S.A. and G.C.H.Q.’s email and phone snooping, along with a whole host of recent scandals in which the western military and spy establishments ignored laws, due process, peoples’ lives and other rather important things, it’s pretty much a ‘given’ that our spooks are hiding stuff from us.
In the interview, Hill-Norton talks about the Bentwater incident, in which a UFO supposedly landed at a UK airbase in 1956 (an incident similar to the later Rendlesham forest incident. Hill-Norton discusses the matter in a logical, matter-of-fact way, using clear and straightforward arguments and his thought-provoking conclusions are sound. The interview isn't too long, and it's interesting all the way through. I heartily recommend it.
But if that's true, then either those aliens are keeping a very low profile or the powers-that-be leading our countries on Earth know about them and they're keeping the fact a secret. This second possibility shouldn't really come as a shock to anyone. 'Knowledge is Power' goes the old adage and powerful people like to be as powerful as possible. We're therefore left with two possibilities; there are no aliens visiting Earth (which is statistically highly unlikely) or there are aliens visiting Earth and our governments are keeping it secret (which is statistically highly likely, but hard to prove). Which is it? Read More...