Comments on: Among the Fringe

By: Jack Sarfatti

Jack Sarfatti — Mon, 20 Sep 2010 17:09:42 +0000

Hey Michael. Use your spell checker so you do not appear to be illiterate.

By: Dr. Quack

Dr. Quack — Sat, 15 Nov 2008 08:41:29 +0000

I think little green men from Mars are actually fallen angels in disguise — operating among man’s subconscious, hallucinations, and visions for the purposes of subverting religion.
Either that or maybe they are visitors from the future.
If they are really from another planet, well, hell, I’m inclined to see that as a world of untamed savages needing to be conquered by a corps of spaceborne Jesuits and conquistadors all searching for the new gold. Maybe Palladium or something? :-) The New World’s exploration was driven by the fact that the dollar value of gold was about $8000/oz in today’s money. That’s why we killed Injuns over it. That’s why we’ll kill green men on Mars over some new high value commodity while making them go to church all the same!

By: michael

michael — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 16:45:13 +0000

I came to this site to see pictures of pot feild’s I am not ammused

By: Jack Sarfatti

Jack Sarfatti — Mon, 05 Nov 2007 07:09:13 +0000

If you want to learn about real pseudophysics that has taken over the best American universities read Lee Smolin’s “The Trouble With Physics” and Peter Woit’s “Not Even Wrong.” This is much more serious than the silly Hafnium Bomb project, though that was not good physics either.

By: bill may

bill may — Wed, 13 Jun 2007 04:57:02 +0000

So who is making these drones that have been seen and photographed over california lately. They appear to be powered by some type of antigravity or electromagnetic drive. See earthfiles.com. a park ranger stated they were watching for fires. It seems like something like that would get some kind of media coverage. Honeywell in Albuquerque is making electric spy drones but I think they are just little electric airplanes. These things are very different. Anyone with any info should contact Linda Moulton howe at earthliles.com. She lives in Albuquerque and is very interested in this stuff. So am I Thanks, Bill

By: GVT12

GVT12 — Mon, 25 Sep 2006 04:56:19 +0000

Yes, I agree with you on some accounts however, there must be a bridge between the two. wasn’t that primary intention of this F-Group?
You remeber the definition of *insanity?
the one that states trying to apply the same formula while expecting different results?
While the conventional scientists apply (*insanity) to what is already “Known” the F-Group searches for the “Unknown“
I see no harm done there.
“Impossible simply means we haven’t done it yet”

By: EGA

EGA — Thu, 15 Jun 2006 06:27:46 +0000

So, “Most scientists dont believe or disbelievethey just look at the data, relying on the tried and true (albeit imperfect) criteria of reproducibility and peer review.“
Having spent thirty years working with and observing scientists in their sandboxes, I assure you that this statement is the pinnacle of naivete. There is no more passionate proponent of cherished “accepted wisdom” on earth than the average scientist, nor one more bitterly hostile to the peer that dares reject his paper!

By: pedestrian

pedestrian — Wed, 14 Jun 2006 16:20:02 +0000

Pass around the tin hats!