17 science 'facts' you might have learned in school that aren't true

SH.org OP Username
Timeshifter
SH.org OP Date
2019-09-19 19:29:21
SH.org Reaction Score
48
SH.org Reply Count
39
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Dielectric
Date: 2019-09-21 21:29:33
Reaction Score: 1
Yes, does lend new meaning to the term Masonic Order huh?

I didn't know about geopolymer's until a couple years ago and I doubt many others have heard of this technique either. Without this form of communication I would probably have never known about geopolymer's, and without knowning about this I would likely have written the whole idea off as cracked. The thing here is that an artist could take bones and create a fake model and then make a silicone mold which can reproduce a fingerprint, so that process is capable of producing an artifact that on the surface would be hard to impossible to detect as not real, after all who knows what dionsaur bone looks like? I don't know that I'm willing to say "no dinosaurs existed" but I will say that there's a pretty attractive financial angle to the possible which is open and crime will follow any open avenue. Finally I know you're right about the displays being fiberglass/epoxy replicas of the originals. Let's say that I hope some dionsaurs are real and that they aren't all fakes. Now the question is can we trust any so called rock with three toes and human foot print? Doesn't seem likely now does it? Lol~
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Dielectric
Date: 2019-09-22 08:31:33
Reaction Score: 0
Timeshifter cited that link back on post 11 and I went and read through it entirely. Now of course originally I disagreed pretty strongly. It was only after a link lead me to geopolymers that I reconsidered, and here I had known about geopolymer's even before this, but ya know I just hadn't thought of their true potential. I think some dinosaurs were real, but then again, the knowledge that casting stone has been known to some people since forever does raise some serious questions.
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: SonofaBush
Date: 2019-09-22 20:35:35
Reaction Score: 2
Veins could probably sustain the blood pressure necessary if the density of the atmosphere was several times what it is now. Why the atmosphere is thinner now does not seem to be explained by proponents of this theory but my guess is that loses during magnetic pole reversals is probably the main factor. Supposedly in order for the winged animals to fly the density of the atmosphere would have had to be at least four or five times what it is now. A much thicker atmosphere also explains how ferns, laurels, palm trees, and Magnolia that could not withstand freezing, thrived at 70 degrees north and south latitude. Today, the equatorial regions would be so hot as to be uninhabitable. Indeed, the oceans would (will? and by end of century?) boil off and you would be (will be?) looking at Venus Syndrome.

The Thick Atmosphere Theory
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Dielectric
Date: 2019-09-22 21:56:41
Reaction Score: 0
That's some excellent clear headed thinking. I really appreciate it when there's a logical sensible response with fresh thinking applied. This Dino business has grown legs in area's I never thought of when I started out long ago searching for answers to climatic changes. I think that the Expand'0
Planetary model is very likely correct because it's been applied photographically to other planets such as Mars.

However, everything you say is still spot on. It's very possible that a pole shift comes with sudden titanic rapture of the crust, much like a lobster splitting it's shell as it grows. I think that what we have been told about meteor's creating disasters are much more likely to have been gigantic sink holes caused by a sub-surface molten core that's become excited by an influx of energies from space, from our own Star. We have had a large increase in sinkholes over the last decade along with splits, cracks, earthquakes, tidal waves, rising and falling sea's, unexplained bridge failures were the land seems to have moved enough that the bride simply falls off it's supports, and many other clues that an expansion phase is on-going, which also includes as you say dramatic breakdowns of the electromagneto sphere of the earth.

I think the powers that be have been actively combating this change but I cannot be sure if they are combating it or trying to make it happen. Those efforts are tied to chemtrails, drilling operations in unlikely and really unexplainable areas, mud flows and geysers of mud, sand, and goo. The strange and inexplicable RFID Like markings in various places, and there's a whole history of stealthy covertness to how the satellite images first came into being that exposed some of those in China. So anyways, I think there's a lot of evidence for a planetary expansion event.

Now my thinking, originally anyways, was that this was caused by induced energies from space, a weakened magnetosphere and so forth. However, it could be that as you say there's just times when a pole shift takes place and which hasn't a damn thing to with inducted energies. Maybe it's related to the orbit of our solar system around the galactic core. That's equally likely in my opinion. In that case you can see just how stupid and pointless it is to be trying to combat so-called climate change. Like you can change that out-come huh? Laughing....so sad.

But ultimately you're right. The weakened magnetosphere is causing shifting the poles at record rates, and a weakened magnetosphere does mean loss of atmosphere. Oxygen is magnetic and the less of it we have the more total atmosphere we tend to lose. The only reason we have an atmosphere is because we have an active geology which makes gases and most of these end up as water and other liquids, such a petroleum, which is why we aren't going to be running out of oil anytime soon, but the wells could stop from shifting earth. An entirely other problem in that case. Nevertheless, the core could be pumping out massive amounts of gases and we could all still end up suffocating if we don't have a strong enough magnetic field. The End is near....no, only kidding....but this all does go a long ways to more rationally explain things.

You're right in all you say. The more dense the relative atmosphere, then the easier it is for winged critters to fly, and that's basic aviation science 101 having to do with relative air density and temp. Any pilot will know this.



Despite good science and good intentions empirical evidence always trumps theory. It's very hard to argue with this evidence of planetary expansion when it can be seen in a visual format. This guy is Neal Adams. He's a famous illustrator for DC Comics and that's interesting in itself because these comic figures are playing a big role in the mass marketing of ideas. If he was doing something which the powers that be objected to then I think he wouldn't have a job so he has to be doing something they approve of. How this fits in to a bigger picture I cannot say but he has produced a whole series of videos involving planetary expansion.

I see now he has one on Mars expanding too. It's been a while since I visited his information but this is some interesting material. As for dinosaur extinction this is still right in line with a loss of atmosphere by a disrupted magnetosphere and then followed by an increased mass, hence gravitational field, as well as the obvious effects which that "Sonofabush" mentioned.
:)

nealadamsdotcom

 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: SonofaBush
Date: 2019-09-22 23:53:46
Reaction Score: 1
Personally I have a hard time buying planetary expansion. However, it is interesting to note that supposedly matter spontaneous comes out of the vacuum of space, at least according to some physicists. It is almost negligible though. Over billions or trillions of years it would add up I am sure. I think that probably explains expansion of a universe that is probably infinite in time and space. Planetary expansion, if true would probably mean they got it backwards with the more matter the more you get out of seemingly nowhere.
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Dielectric
Date: 2019-09-24 03:44:20
Reaction Score: 0
Jesus, I really must insist that you avoid these two, if only on the grounds that we haven't got time to listen to the two Ronnie's babble with so little humor. At least with the originals there was serious entertainment value. Email them some helpful clips I say.
Snort~ Lol

I love this dinosaur sized problem stuff. Suppose we just forget the expand'o planet and just think what it would take to make a dinosaur live if it also needed an highly oxygenated atmosphere with a greater air density, because ya know what? I'm beginning to think I can't have it both ways.
If you have a much smaller planet then a weaker gravitational field, what's to keep the atmosphere from leaking away even faster than it normally does? How does the air get 4 X times denser? Huston we may have a problem...
Post automatically merged:

Oh crap, turns out we are both wrong again.
Giant 32FT CROCODILES preyed on dinosaurs 210 million years ago, experts say after finding fossilized teeth in Africa
210 million-year-old fossils of croc-like creature found


https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2019/09/23/17/18834960-7495153-image-a-13_1569256327846.jpg
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: zxcv0
Date: 2019-09-24 05:23:18
Reaction Score: 1
Dinosaurs are among the most essential pieces in selling the current interpretation of science and our universe, including but not limited to the age of our world, our history, evolution (a poorly thought-out idea with scant evidence to support it), that big rocks flying around in space can decimate earth, and that your existence is a random occurrence. And if you believe in this line of thinking, you're also likelier to subscribe to the idea of aliens floating about in space, space missions to the moon and beyond, and all the other magic hocus-pocus you're inundated with on a daily basis.

Dinosaurs are a crucial jigsaw piece in the pseudo-scientific model that dominates modern-day thinking. Yet there is enough research and evidence out there if you care to look for it that shows how flimsy, unscientific and downright scandalous the dinosaur myth is.
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Feralimal
Date: 2019-09-24 06:53:52
Reaction Score: 1
I agree their humour is only so-so (maybe it's a twins thing), but I like that they make a rational argument and express their reasoning, without missing any steps.
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Dielectric
Date: 2019-09-24 07:54:31
Reaction Score: 0
First of all you have no Avatar, and this is something I must insist you address. I have taken the liberty to locate a suitable one for you.
https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net...a/a9/Ed.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20141025075646

Next you should review the thread before jumping on someone.

Dinosaurs are not a myth, or if they are then you need to approach the subject with a good deal more knowledge and critical thinking, because there's far too many examples recovered almost intact to simply proclaim they is all fake and then run away. You cannot simply dismiss dinosaurs as myths and wash your hands of the problem and expect to be taken seriously. You're going to have to do a lot better than that. They aren't fakes but they are money makers, just like meteors are money makers too.

The real question, if you review the discussion I've been having, is what they represent in dollar value. That's really what we have been talking about as far as what their importance is to the powers that be. Once you grasp this then you deal with the likelyhood of falsified critters and how that could be done, and there again that's what we have been discussing already.
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: zxcv0
Date: 2019-09-24 08:22:54
Reaction Score: 3
Yes I can, and I will. I have no interest in convincing you, or anyone else here, of anything. I am not an academic seeking approval from peers, let alone randoms on an internet forum. I'm flatly refuting absurdist theories, such as those you posit about dinosaurs, with the elegance and earnestness they deserve - none at all.

In the same way that you can try and shift the burden of proof on me, I will throw it right back at you. However, since you will present nothing I haven't already seen, I have no desire to engage in debates regarding fairy tales, and will leave that for other members who may wish to.

You asked to what end. I answered that (and only that, because I have no interest in the broader context of this thread) with plausible reasons for the creation of the dinosaur myth. The fact that you have chosen to focus on 'dollar value' of the dinosaur hoax simply proves how cluttered your thinking is.

Money is meaningless to people that can create currency out of thin air by the stroke of a keyboard. Shaping beliefs, on the other hand, isn't. If our current model of the universe, supported in no small part by the one-time 'existence' of dinosaurs, fell apart, the very fabric of what our society is built on would also fall apart.

That said, feel free to believe the 'dollar value' of dinosaurs is more important than upholding the primacy of scientism.
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Dielectric
Date: 2019-09-24 09:15:35
Reaction Score: 0
Thanks; a delight I'm sure.
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: madroona
Date: 2019-09-26 10:28:43
Reaction Score: 1
A gentle reminder that virtually every "fact" of science is an idea promulgated by a crowd, typically focused through the lens of the need for financial, job or personal security. Scientific knowledge is but a snapshot of current understanding, subject to virtually continual change, when within a truly free-thinking environment. At science's heart, essentially only mathematics and algebra are systems that can be boiled down to "fact" or truism, the rest, at present, is subjective.

Much of the conjecture above in this thread is exactly that, conjecture, and this is said without malice or effort to flame.
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Dielectric
Date: 2019-09-27 09:28:00
Reaction Score: 0
Don't ya think it's a common misconception that's been pounded in to peoples heads that mathematics is infallible, which has lead to the absurd notion that it also cannot be corrupted, and, Yet again, it seems equally adept at cooking the books as the mind which guides it; no? So I think a policeman would have quite a different interpretation and would more likely view all forms of mathematics with suspicion since its so adept at fooling people having been long cloaked in this lie of incorruptibility.

Group consensus is not science, nor fact, it's simply the tyranny of mob rule and mobs do not form individual thoughts but are guided by them. Whatever qualifies as a science fact by group consensus is something to be questioned. So I would agree with you there.

It's fine to question the reality of dinosaurs. There's lots of good reasons to question them which group consensus doesn't. Still the idea that every dinosaur is a fraud is pushing the limit's of good sense. So I think that if we are to do that, to question the viability of this narrative then you have to have ways to show where it's at fault, unexplained, and equally how the evidence could be fabricated, as well as what motives may exist.
Post automatically merged:

That's because I suspect you've been studying or involved with quantum physics which teaches that matter comes from nowhere. Am I right?
What we do know is that a fusion process, typically in stars and in planets with a active geology, and maybe some that don't even have an active geology is where matter is created. For that reason it's a good guess that core of our planet is composed of a plasma and sustained by energies from space, and by way of brikeland currents flowing from our own star.
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: rengel
Date: 2019-09-27 11:32:02
Reaction Score: 0
Oops, indeed!
Hypersound is called 'Hypersound' because it has higher frequencies than normal sound, not because it is faster than light (see: Ultrasonics).
Post automatically merged:

Which one are you talking about: Food Pyramids From Around the World?
There are many more. Just google for 'food pyramids'.
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: JWW427
Date: 2019-09-27 12:25:57
Reaction Score: 0
The US Army hyper sound system, like many "overt" weapons, has parts, performance, and tech data that is highly classified.
Ill dig through my notes, but I believe part of the system does exceed the speed of light in some form.
JWW
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Onijunbei
Date: 2019-09-27 17:05:20
Reaction Score: 1
Myth. Gravity is a force that makes objects fall to the ground
Myth. All atoms are spherical if they even exist at all. Elements break down into, oh ya, elements
Myth. Oil is made from old vegetation.
Myth. The big bang
Myth. Einstein was a genius.
Myth. Planets are 3 dimensional objects but they travel in a 2 dimensional plane
Myth. The Sun is a nuclear reactor.
Myth. Nitrogen is so much better for your tires even though the atmosphere is already 80% nitrogen...
Blah blah blah blah
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: JWW427
Date: 2019-09-27 18:00:08
Reaction Score: 2
Aha!
Pure Nitrogen is only effective for soft compound racing slicks, not ho-hum street tires that don't heat up enough from extreme high speed and curves. My misspent youth as a racer taught me that, but I still didn't win any races.
But I agree, blah, blah, blah...

But wait, there's even more myths!

• The Moon is in "synchronous rotation" with the Earth just like all the other moons in our solar system. (Suspiciously, it's the only one.)
• The Moon is solid and younger than the Earth.

moon.jpegWTF?

• The Earth has a molten iron core that is the main generator of gravity.
• Terrestrial plants give off the most oxygen, especially in the Amazon. (The oceans do by a wide margin.)
• Global warming is solely a man-made phenomenon. (Caused by stupid racing drivers and their cars' leaded racing fuel)
• All that excess carbon dioxide from global warming is bad. (The trees and plants love it!)
• Einstein was a great patent clerk. (He sucked at it)
• Butter and animal fat are bad for you. (No way. Moderation is key, though.)
• "Consciousness" is just your waking self, as in you are not asleep. (Nice try)
• The Earth is only 4.54 billion years old. (More like 12B, says many insider-whistleblower Secret Space Program super soldiers!)
• Kommodo Dragons breathe fire. (Nope. Their saliva is poisonous, but their breath must be super harsh.)
• Humans evolved from apes. (There's no "missing link" because there isn't one. Neanderthals and other proto-humans like Australopithicus did not pack the gear for speech, no way, no how, yet their brain size was bigger in cubic cm than ours. Go figure.)
• Oblong skulls found in Peru are the result of strapping boards to the heads of children. (The skulls in the Peru museums have 2.5 times the brain capacity than normal human skulls, a physical impossibility from "planking" a child's forehead. Pretty good cover story though.)

peru.jpeg

JWW
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: rengel
Date: 2019-09-28 05:08:18
Reaction Score: 1
Why is that? It should be normal if your arguments are sound and you are talking to a rational person.
On the other hand, if this doesn't happen, what does this tell you about the person you are talking to?
Post automatically merged:

Actually, dinosaurs bones were known before that time (i.e. see Robert Plot), but not recognized as a separate class of entitities.

Post automatically merged:

BTW: If you are interested in Palaeontology you might like Palaeontologica Electronica.
 
Tips
Tips
Please respect our Posting Rules.
Back
Top