Can Someone Explain Why...

Please try to accept the difference between
"a theory" which can be tested, and possibly proved wrong or, in time
accepted as true, until something better comes along,
and "fantasy", which while more entertaining over a limited time span
is rather puerile.

jc

--
http://mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/jc_atm/



---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.723 / Virus Database: 479 - Release Date: 19/07/2004

The tests were performed in 1958 to determine if artificial radiation belts
could be created. The tests were in fact a success; three shots were
detonated at approximately 300 miles above the earth. The test was a
success. The theory was correct. Suggest you research Nicholas Cristofilos
of Lawrence Livermore Labs. Check out ARGUS project in 1958. These tests
were followed in 1962(?) with the Starfish shots.


"Benign Vanilla" wrote in message
...

"Yoda" wrote in message
t.cable.rogers.com...
Can someone please explain why atomic weapons were tested on the Van
Allen Belts, and what effects it had and what effects we will see in the
future the overall results such actions will have for the long term
survival of the human race? Explain what that type of 'science' hoped
to accomplish? Serious replies only, please.

As I understand it, the weapons were not test ON the Van Allen belts, but
were detonated in space to examine the theory of creating artificial Van
Allen belts. The idea was that if you created such a belt over the US
temporarily, maybe the radiation would cause all incoming ICBM's to be
fried
and fall harmlessly into the atmosphere. The tests failed. The theory was
incorrect.

BV.

The tests were performed in 1958 to determine if artificial radiation belts
could be created. The tests were in fact a success; three shots were
detonated at approximately 300 miles above the earth. The test was a
success. The theory was correct. Suggest you research Nicholas Cristofilos
of Lawrence Livermore Labs. Check out ARGUS project in 1958. These tests
were followed in 1962(?) with the Starfish shots.


"Benign Vanilla" wrote in message
...

"Yoda" wrote in message
t.cable.rogers.com...
Can someone please explain why atomic weapons were tested on the Van
Allen Belts, and what effects it had and what effects we will see in the
future the overall results such actions will have for the long term
survival of the human race? Explain what that type of 'science' hoped
to accomplish? Serious replies only, please.

As I understand it, the weapons were not test ON the Van Allen belts, but
were detonated in space to examine the theory of creating artificial Van
Allen belts. The idea was that if you created such a belt over the US
temporarily, maybe the radiation would cause all incoming ICBM's to be
fried
and fall harmlessly into the atmosphere. The tests failed. The theory was
incorrect.

BV.

John Carruthers wrote:

Please try to accept the difference between
"a theory" which can be tested, and possibly proved wrong or, in time
accepted as true, until something better comes along,
and "fantasy", which while more entertaining over a limited time span
is rather puerile.

jc

--
http://mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/jc_atm/


I already know why they did the experiment according to what reasons
they gave. I also intentional left out the 'who did it' on purpose. I
also have a very good idea what long term effects that foolhardy
experiment will produce. I wanted to see if there is anybody on this
newsgroup who has a clue? So far it doesn't look too good.

Maybe everyone should continue to wrestle with blackhole theories, and
leave understanding of Cosmology to the real scientists.

John Carruthers wrote:

Please try to accept the difference between
"a theory" which can be tested, and possibly proved wrong or, in time
accepted as true, until something better comes along,
and "fantasy", which while more entertaining over a limited time span
is rather puerile.

jc

--
http://mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/jc_atm/


I already know why they did the experiment according to what reasons
they gave. I also intentional left out the 'who did it' on purpose. I
also have a very good idea what long term effects that foolhardy
experiment will produce. I wanted to see if there is anybody on this
newsgroup who has a clue? So far it doesn't look too good.

Maybe everyone should continue to wrestle with blackhole theories, and
leave understanding of Cosmology to the real scientists.

wrote:

The tests were performed in 1958 to determine if artificial radiation belts
could be created.

That still doesn't answer my question, what science hoped to accomplish?
Why create 'artificial belts' in the first place? If I wanted that
type of a lame answer, I would have merely read it online.

The tests were in fact a success;

The tests were a 'sucess'? Hardly. Wait til all mankind is dead, then
declare such insane science a 'success'.


three shots were
detonated at approximately 300 miles above the earth. The test was a
success. The theory was correct.

What theory? We need new Van Allen Belts? Like who the hell do these
'scientists' think they are, to mess around with earth's protective
layer? Scumbags is what they are.

Suggest you research Nicholas Cristofilos
of Lawrence Livermore Labs. Check out ARGUS project in 1958. These tests
were followed in 1962(?) with the Starfish shots.

If I wanted a historical lesson, I would have asked.





"Benign Vanilla" wrote in message
...

"Yoda" wrote in message
. net.cable.rogers.com...

Can someone please explain why atomic weapons were tested on the Van
Allen Belts, and what effects it had and what effects we will see in the
future the overall results such actions will have for the long term
survival of the human race? Explain what that type of 'science' hoped
to accomplish? Serious replies only, please.

As I understand it, the weapons were not test ON the Van Allen belts, but
were detonated in space to examine the theory of creating artificial Van
Allen belts. The idea was that if you created such a belt over the US
temporarily, maybe the radiation would cause all incoming ICBM's to be

fried

and fall harmlessly into the atmosphere. The tests failed. The theory was
incorrect.

BV.

wrote:

The tests were performed in 1958 to determine if artificial radiation belts
could be created.

That still doesn't answer my question, what science hoped to accomplish?
Why create 'artificial belts' in the first place? If I wanted that
type of a lame answer, I would have merely read it online.

The tests were in fact a success;

The tests were a 'sucess'? Hardly. Wait til all mankind is dead, then
declare such insane science a 'success'.


three shots were
detonated at approximately 300 miles above the earth. The test was a
success. The theory was correct.

What theory? We need new Van Allen Belts? Like who the hell do these
'scientists' think they are, to mess around with earth's protective
layer? Scumbags is what they are.

Suggest you research Nicholas Cristofilos
of Lawrence Livermore Labs. Check out ARGUS project in 1958. These tests
were followed in 1962(?) with the Starfish shots.

If I wanted a historical lesson, I would have asked.





"Benign Vanilla" wrote in message
...

"Yoda" wrote in message
. net.cable.rogers.com...

Can someone please explain why atomic weapons were tested on the Van
Allen Belts, and what effects it had and what effects we will see in the
future the overall results such actions will have for the long term
survival of the human race? Explain what that type of 'science' hoped
to accomplish? Serious replies only, please.

As I understand it, the weapons were not test ON the Van Allen belts, but
were detonated in space to examine the theory of creating artificial Van
Allen belts. The idea was that if you created such a belt over the US
temporarily, maybe the radiation would cause all incoming ICBM's to be

fried

and fall harmlessly into the atmosphere. The tests failed. The theory was
incorrect.

BV.

Well put for the kooks online here, they need help distinguishing the
difference between opinion and facts. Do you know the difference?

The big bang is an opinion, it sure the hell isn't a fact. The reality
of higher dimensions is a fact, not an opinion. Darwinian-Lamarckian
evolution is an opinion, not a fact (unless you are about as smart as a
bag of hammers). Temperature flux and equilibrium in the universe
doesn't prove there was a big bang, merely that there is such a thing as
infrared photons. To state that such photons existing 'proves' the big
bang opinion to be a fact is like saying because you smelled a fart from
your dog, must mean that the whole universe is filled with farts.
Patently moronic and utterly simplistic dogmatic bull**** is what the
big bang 'theory' amounts to.


The mystery of UFO's existing is a fact! Not an opinion. Unless
ofcourse you are about as smart as a bag of hammers.

Real 'crop circles' is a fact, not an opinion. Unless ofcourse you
think the universe is filled with dog farts in a state of thermal
equilibrium, then you can have your 'bag of hammers'.

Just don't confuse your insanity with reality.

John Carruthers wrote:

Please try to accept the difference between
"a theory" which can be tested, and possibly proved wrong or, in time
accepted as true, until something better comes along,
and "fantasy", which while more entertaining over a limited time span
is rather puerile.

jc

--
http://mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/jc_atm/



---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.723 / Virus Database: 479 - Release Date: 19/07/2004

Well put for the kooks online here, they need help distinguishing the
difference between opinion and facts. Do you know the difference?

The big bang is an opinion, it sure the hell isn't a fact. The reality
of higher dimensions is a fact, not an opinion. Darwinian-Lamarckian
evolution is an opinion, not a fact (unless you are about as smart as a
bag of hammers). Temperature flux and equilibrium in the universe
doesn't prove there was a big bang, merely that there is such a thing as
infrared photons. To state that such photons existing 'proves' the big
bang opinion to be a fact is like saying because you smelled a fart from
your dog, must mean that the whole universe is filled with farts.
Patently moronic and utterly simplistic dogmatic bull**** is what the
big bang 'theory' amounts to.


The mystery of UFO's existing is a fact! Not an opinion. Unless
ofcourse you are about as smart as a bag of hammers.

Real 'crop circles' is a fact, not an opinion. Unless ofcourse you
think the universe is filled with dog farts in a state of thermal
equilibrium, then you can have your 'bag of hammers'.

Just don't confuse your insanity with reality.

John Carruthers wrote:

Please try to accept the difference between
"a theory" which can be tested, and possibly proved wrong or, in time
accepted as true, until something better comes along,
and "fantasy", which while more entertaining over a limited time span
is rather puerile.

jc

--
http://mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/jc_atm/



---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.723 / Virus Database: 479 - Release Date: 19/07/2004

"Yoda" wrote in message
news

John Carruthers wrote:

Please try to accept the difference between
"a theory" which can be tested, and possibly proved wrong or, in time
accepted as true, until something better comes along,
and "fantasy", which while more entertaining over a limited time span
is rather puerile.

I already know why they did the experiment according to what reasons
they gave. I also intentional left out the 'who did it' on purpose. I
also have a very good idea what long term effects that foolhardy
experiment will produce. I wanted to see if there is anybody on this
newsgroup who has a clue? So far it doesn't look too good.

So now that you believe we are all clueless, why don't you enlighten us, o
great one?