The Electric Universe: 1,800 thunderstorms occurring at any time around the world - Are the Dominoes Falling for Standard Cosmology?
This blog will end the Light Series for now. There are so many other topics that require urgent attention. But here is what you might want to research for yourself next, if you happen to have some free time.
Earth Custodians rely on simplicity. If the 101 of any theory cannot be explained to a 18 years old easily, it will most likely be proven wrong in due time. Earth Custodians pay a serious attention to any concept probing electricity, as electricity drives consciousness and even the DNA, which also stores data extracted from Light.
Here comes the Electric Universe Theory (E.U), which is about to dismantle academia as we know it. Almost everything that has been taken for granted over the last 200 years will have to be rewritten.
First it begins with "And God said, let there be light" (Genesis 1:3)
If one agrees that electricity is the cause/drive behind every molecular and sub-particle interaction and very existence, then such a question does need to be. So why is academia so stubborn? As a matter of fact academia hates the E.U for being a threat to the entire establishment!!! Electricity also explains the duality of Light, why It is a wave and a particle. Electricity arranges and manages all chemical reactions and mating between molecules. All life depends, on electricity, even water. Atoms only get together or reject one one another depending on their electric components/charges, whether they are compatible or not.
Did you know that there are, at any given moment, some 1,800 thunderstorms are in progress over Earth's surface? Do you know that there exist "upward lightnings" - going up from the surface of earth ? What does it mean? That Earth and the Sun exchange electric discharges? Do you know that the brain synapses exchange data in the form of electric pulses? That bees and flowers communicate using electrical fields? That electromagnetism (a byproduct of electricity) guide migrating birds to their destination? Etc...
So here you go now, get some popcorn and have a good time watching WHY Academia (departments of physics and cosmology) today lives in fear!
Yes, sorry folks, the big bang and gravitation theories are destined to be buried for good
Amazing Upward Lightning!
Are the Dominoes Falling for Standard Cosmology?
Science headlines today show signs that elements of the electric universe paradigm are becoming increasingly mainstream. With leaps in technology and data have come the definitive refutation of the notion of an electrically sterile universe.
The Electric Universe Theory 2016
Australian physicist Wallace Thornhill updated his lifelong investigation of "the Electric Universe" that offers a revolutionary view of the cosmos, our solar system history, the nature of the Sun, the behavior of comets, and stellar and galactic evolution.
The Electric Universe Theory: Does Electricity Rule the Solar System
The Electric Universe theory highlights the importance of electricity throughout the Universe. Ever wondered why NASA are always puzzled at every new discovery in space, and why its vaunted "experts" are consistently incapable of explaining any phenomenon without recourse to mathematical gymnastics and imaginary constructions pulled from the nearest hat? Unfortunately, it is becoming increasingly clear that the universe and everything in it is motivated by electricity, and that gravity is simply the observed result of charge differential. Strangely we know (or THINK we know) that subatomic particles such as neutrons, protons and electrons are controlled by electrical forces, yet for some reason this is ignored when we think on bigger scales.
David Icke The Electrical & Plasma Universe Theory
How Electricity Helps The Body To Heal Faster
The Electric Light Lenses of Creation
This unit, written by Robert Otey explains in great detail, the role of the light lenses of creation as authored by Walter Russell. Also discussed in detail, the anode and cathode wave motions of the inert gases unfolded and refolded from the still magnetic light of mind and the interactive role of light lenses in the construction and deconstruction of matter.
Theory Of Light Applied... The Benefits Of Sun Gazing !
The 'Intelligent Design' Is Mathematically Provable. Game Over!?
The Holy Secret Of The DNA And The Intergalactic Battle To Control It
One cannot resolve the issues with the mindset that created them. Yes, it is possible to see way ahead of the curve, and if it takes one generation for a money-free society to take shape, that shouldn't prevent anyone from taking action, and using money strictly for online advertising until a critical mass (20% of population) is reached. The metaphysics of the Earth Custodians Movement is The Spiritual Science Of Vibration
Ooh, can't wait to read this one after my exam, shortly... 🤗
Loved it! by the way my favorite Thornhill cartoon
rofol... excellent!!!
The electric universe has been disproved in the 1950's. There is no electric current running through our solar system lighting up our sun like a light bulb.
Speaking of electricity and money, I can't wait until we get rid of money. I am tired of paying for my electricity! Let's get rid of money so someone, for some reason, will give me all the electricity I want for free. lolz
"The electric universe has been disproved in the 1950's"
Can you please be just a little bit vaguer?
Here, let me be of assistance, because I know google can be tricky:
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Electric_Universe
http://web.archive.org/web/20150416003346/http://www.theplasmaverse.com/pdfs/the-electic-sky-book-by-donaldescott-review-discussion-against.pdf
The first link you provided is just what the title expresses a rational or an opinion. As far as the second one is concerned not only is the 1st assumption incorrect. In "The Gamut of Science and Physics Conceptual Failures." It states "Scott states that astronomers assume that the physical laws in the distant cosmos are different from those known on the Earth"
No the electric universe uses the same laws that are found on earth. To debunk this please give a quote from any of the proponents of the electric universe who states otherwise.
2 : In the post it states "The appearance of a difference can arise because some measurements may not currently be possible in Earth laboratories. The vacuum between stars is still less dense than the best vacuum possible in the laboratory.
But one can see the effects with one's own eyes "best vacuum possible in the laboratory not withstanding.
After reading that I became disinterested in reading more. But if you find that quote from a proponents of the electric universe I would be more than willing to look at it.
And your right "google can be tricky" I don't care to fall for the tricks. Old books are a bit better.
First link: not an opinion, just a statement of fact.
Electric Universe (EU) is an umbrella term that covers various pseudo-scientific cosmological ideas built around the claim that the formation and existence of various features of the Universe can be better explained by electricity and magnetism than by gravity alone. As a rule, EU is usually touted as an aether-based theory with numerous references to tall tales from mythology. However, the exact details and claims are ambiguous, lack mathematical formalism, and often vary from one delusional crank to the next.
Second link: A paper debunking a electric universe book called, The Electric Sky. Scott states on page 7 of that book that the physical laws in the distant cosmos are different. So take that up with you electric buddy.
Yes, old discarded texts are best for propping up discarded theories, I will give you that.
One can not name that which he has not created. which is what whoever is written this is attempting to do. Again give me a statement where a proponent of the electric universe is stating that "this is a pseudo-scientific cosmological idea." You cant. People have an opinion and that cool but it does not make their opinions fact.
I have never heard of Dr.Scoot saying anything like that and I believe that it was never a statement that he made but just an enturptation of something he said (The most likly topic would be on the pinch affect). And the statement "and often vary from one delusional crank to the next." If that is not an opinion, I'll rest my case on lack of common ground.
So only proponents of electric universe are capable of stating facts? That is an interesting way of looking at things. And if you personally haven't heard of something, well it couldn't possibly have happened then.
I will leave you with a small excerpt from Micheal Shermer's (author of the skeptic column in Scientific American) column after he attended the electric universe conference in 2015:
"The acid test of a scientific claim, I explained, is prediction and falsification. My friends at the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory, for example, tell me they use both Newtonian mechanics and Einstein’s relativity theory in computing highly accurate spacecraft trajectories to the planets. If Newton and Einstein are wrong, I inquired of EU proponent Wallace Thornhill, can you generate spacecraft flight paths that are more accurate than those based on gravitational theory? No, he replied. GPS satellites in orbit around Earth are also dependent on relativity theory, so I asked the conference host David Talbott if EU theory offers anything like the practical applications that theoretical physics has given us. No. Then what does EU theory add? A deeper understanding of nature, I was told. Oh.
The EU folks I met were unfailingly polite, unquestionably smart and steadfastly unwavering in their belief that they have made one of the most important discoveries in the history of science. Have they? Probably not. The problem was articulated in a comment Thornhill made when I asked for their peer-reviewed papers: “In an interdisciplinary science like the Electric Universe, you could say we have no peers, so peer review is not available.”
I never stated that " only proponents of the electric universe are capable of stating facts?" But if you turn that around one could say that only the
big bang proponents are allow to state facts.
First of all I thought I was having a conversation with you not Micheal Shermer.
With respect, I have to wonder do you ever think for yourself? That's cool if you can't come up with anything yourself, I'll deal with what you got. But before I do let me state that no one lease of all me is questioning Newton. Having said that, did you know that there at least 4 types of black holes and 3 types of big bangs. Having 4 types of black holes and 3 types of big bangs to me is like hedging cosmological bets.
Since scientists first proposed the big bang theory, many people have questioned and criticized the model. There are some major question and many small ones. I'll just state the major ones, some of the biggest. 1. It violates the first law of thermodynamics, which says you can't create or destroy matter or energy. As you know the big bang theory suggests the universe began out of nothing. 2. The formation of stars and galaxies violates the law of entropy, which suggests systems of change become less organized over time. But if you view the early universe as completely homogeneous and isotropic, then the current univiserse shows signs of obeying the law of entropy. 3. Scientists have misinterpreted evidence like the redshift of celestial bodies (this is a fact demostrated by Halton Arp's work) and the cosmic microwave background radiation . Also some cite the absence of exotic cosmic bodies that should have been according to the theory (which is why they spend many millions looking for them with the LHC.) also the early inflationary period of the big bang appears to violate the rule that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. So Einstein theorys are far from perfect but that is not saying that it is totlly unuseable. Last thing peer review means just that, being review by your peers. As this is a new field you can't ask someone without an understanding of the work to review it. That would be like asking a steam boat manufacturer to evaluate the blueprints of a nuclear submarine. As far as "practical applications" we live and work under the light of a scientist who disagreed with the big bang theory his name is Nikola Tesla.
Please don't take this personal it is just an observaion.
I never heard of Micheal Shermer before so naturally I had to look him up. Seem he thinks there is no problem with the 911 official story, he a big fan of big pharma so ofcause there is no corruption in medicine. The government never conducts false operations. and last but not at the lease is he want to rename cognitive dissonance as the "back fire affect". Does he think we are not smart enough to remember cognitive dissonance?
All this comes from the introductory video on his home page
https://michaelshermer.com/
Maybe you should think about the quote on water!
I don't see that as a great source!
Thanks for sharing this information and videos. A lot to take in, I'll keep working through it all!
glad you are having a good time on this path for the truth.
Dante's Inferno