January 9th, 2017
There's a reason why I keep saying, "When NASA scientist and I disagree you should default to believing them not me"
It's because the more I learn the more I understand some of the holes in my knowledge and how that could skew my interpretations of things. While I have tried my best to be accurate when making statements, a brief reread of some of my material shows how much my knowledge has grown, improved and changed.
March 29th, 2017 because of an increased interest in this page, I've decided to go back start at page one and rewrite every page removing any erroneous statements based on my current knowledge. As I correct a page I will change the background from white to black. That's not to say black pages 45-70 only contain accurate info as I made them black before I started this rewrite. It took me a year and half to write this site and it will take a while to make all the corrections.
On this page I intend to go back over some of my material and correct some of the obvious errors.
Hopefully by doing this, it will help solidify in my mind those things that are correct and remove those that aren't.
It's because the more I learn the more I understand some of the holes in my knowledge and how that could skew my interpretations of things. While I have tried my best to be accurate when making statements, a brief reread of some of my material shows how much my knowledge has grown, improved and changed.
March 29th, 2017 because of an increased interest in this page, I've decided to go back start at page one and rewrite every page removing any erroneous statements based on my current knowledge. As I correct a page I will change the background from white to black. That's not to say black pages 45-70 only contain accurate info as I made them black before I started this rewrite. It took me a year and half to write this site and it will take a while to make all the corrections.
On this page I intend to go back over some of my material and correct some of the obvious errors.
Hopefully by doing this, it will help solidify in my mind those things that are correct and remove those that aren't.
|
On Page 4 I indicated this area outlined in yellow was an iceberg debris field. I no longer see it that way. It appears more like a softened land ice surface that has been weathered into sharp peaks.
While icebergs may be colliding and clustering along the edge of this land ice mass, further inland it appears as though the land ice is being naturally formed by weather, softened mud like ices and sublimation. Scientist are now calling these sharp angular peaks "Penitentes". This seems like a pretty good description of some of these features at least the ones on Tartarus Dorsa just east of my yellow outline. One significant point here, there are few if any impact craters indicating a relatively soft and frequently renewed surface just like we see on SP. |
|
|
These are Penitentes on earth. Wiki says Louis Lliboutry noted that the key climatic condition for the differential ablation that leads to the formation of penitentes is that the dew point is always below freezing. Thus, snow will sublimate. Once the process of differential ablation starts, the surface geometry of the evolving penitente produces a positive feedback mechanism, and radiation is trapped by multiple reflections between the walls. |
|
The hollows become almost a black body for radiation, while decreased wind leads to air saturation, increasing dew point temperature and the onset of melting. In this way peaks, where mass loss is due only to sublimation, will remain, as well as the steep walls, which intercept only a minimum of solar radiation. In the troughs, the ablation is enhanced, leading to a downward growth of penitentes. |
|
|
Error from Page 5
This is Peri Planitia a depression just west of the burp bulge called Viking Tera. I've used three possible scenarios to explain this land feature.
My views have changed and improved as they do, my interpretations change. NASA calls this feature sublimation. |
|
On my Basins Page 70, I demonstrated how one land mass rising causes a nearby land mass to collapse as is the case on Mars and at the Batagaika crater in Siberia. Batagaika began collapsing 60 years ago and continues to this day as the subsurface frozen methane evaporates due to rising global temperatures.
Batagaika crater in Siberia Russia
|
Batagaika is adjacent to a Volcanic mountain
|
|
Page 6 had a couple big boo-boo's showing impact sites in places where there are none. They've been removed.
|
The Spider image above is in fact an expansion zone where subsurface pressures have caused the land to expand upward and fracture similar to Viking Terra. The image on the right show's Peri Planitia as two potential impacts and Viking Tera as an impact site. They are not. I also used an outline of SP surface depressions (i.e.. polygonal cellular troughs) to suggest the subsurface contained impact sites. Total speculation and from what I know today all these impact sites were wrongly interpreted. The troughs on the surface of Sputnik Planitia, however, may actually be a direct representation of subsurface fractures.
The below images were from Page 6 titled Cracks. I must have been on crack when I saw all these non-impact sites as impacts. I've since removed these images and added additional accurate helpful information on page 6.
The below images were from Page 6 titled Cracks. I must have been on crack when I saw all these non-impact sites as impacts. I've since removed these images and added additional accurate helpful information on page 6.
|
|
From Page 7 onward my observations appear to improve as I find fewer subsequent interpretational errors, until I get to Page 12, that is.
|
I put some effort into understanding Pluto/Charon's path as they orbit the sun but I got it wrong. I'm very disappointed in this Boo-Boo as I spent a lot of time trying to get it right.
What I got wrong was the direction the poles were pointing. In this and other images I have Pluto's north pole pointing diagonally down and toward the left but it is in fact pointing in the same direction as Mars, Neptune and Saturn in this image. So the north pole is actually aiming at the sun when its at 3 o-clock and the south pole is aiming toward the Sun when Pluto's at 9 o-clock. Girrrrrrrrrr |
|
|
I should have trusted this image created by Emily Lakdawalla which shows Pluto with the correct orientation as it travels around the sun. I was, at the time, finding and hearing conflicting information related to Pluto's alignment and didn't know what to accept. To the best of my knowledge this is a correct representation of Pluto as it travels around the sun. |
This fact only slightly alters some of my conclusions, like when an impact might have occurred on the North pole of Charon not if it occurred or when the south pole was heated in its orbit not if it was heated.
On Page 18 I felt as I do today that the core could not be a radioactively hot ball creating an ocean of water but I was limited in my view by what types of energy could be available to create SP, impacts seemed to be the only source of energy I could figure out, at that time, this was my comment and conclusion.
Impacts
shock waves
energy
geology
In my mind I wasn't yet ready to see Pluto/Charon as having previously been in an eccentric elliptical orbit which created significant tidal stretching. I have expanded this view of potential energy sources to include tidal stretching along with impacts as a potential source for driving Pluto's heart beat at SP. This expanded view also really helps explain the southern hemisphere of Charon. An impact at Mordor could have initiated the release of the subsurface fluids created by the tidal stretching. There are loads of angular bits resting on the southern hemisphere of Charon suggesting chunks of crust were blown off and settled back onto the surface.
My view of tidal flex energy has expanded beyond eccentric orbits in the past to include current Milankovitch cycles.
On Page 18 I felt as I do today that the core could not be a radioactively hot ball creating an ocean of water but I was limited in my view by what types of energy could be available to create SP, impacts seemed to be the only source of energy I could figure out, at that time, this was my comment and conclusion.
Impacts
shock waves
energy
geology
In my mind I wasn't yet ready to see Pluto/Charon as having previously been in an eccentric elliptical orbit which created significant tidal stretching. I have expanded this view of potential energy sources to include tidal stretching along with impacts as a potential source for driving Pluto's heart beat at SP. This expanded view also really helps explain the southern hemisphere of Charon. An impact at Mordor could have initiated the release of the subsurface fluids created by the tidal stretching. There are loads of angular bits resting on the southern hemisphere of Charon suggesting chunks of crust were blown off and settled back onto the surface.
My view of tidal flex energy has expanded beyond eccentric orbits in the past to include current Milankovitch cycles.
After Page 18, I think I had a pretty good run of interpretations that were reasonable and accurate.
|
There is a potential error on my Nuts Page 31
Some scientist are fairly strongly convinced now that Ramesses II AKA Ramesses the Great was the Pharaoh running Egypt during the time of the Jewish exodus story. At the time I wrote my Nuts page the prevailing belief was that Thutmose III was the reigning Pharaoh which would make sense considering the connection to the name Thut-moses. I don't agree with this image's interpretations just posting it as an example. A more likely scenario is that stories were orally passed down incorporating fantasies that embellished names and myths with some elements of truth mingled with historic superstition to create the exodus story. Mingling Moses and the exploits of Ramesses and ten plagues together becomes a more exotic mythical tale of grandeur. |
This image is one person's interpretation of history. I don't agree with it just using it to demonstrate how people believe Thutmose III was the Pharaoh during the Jewish exodus.
|
|
If the more recent information is correct, which it appears to be, it would put the exodus 200 years after the time frame I suggested on Page 31.
Thutmose III was Pharaoh around 1479 while Ramesses the Great was Pharaoh in 1279. Just thought I should clear that up. |
|
If you're interested, this 2 hour long video does a good job of explaining the real science based version of how Canaanites evolved into the Jewish nation of Israel.
In this video, biblical fantasies are replaced by, science, reason, archeology and documented history. This is a video of how myth and history merged and how the inhabitants of Canaan developed some of these biblical tales. |
|
|
Here's another boo-boo most of it is correct but the fluid along the western edge section that looks a little like the calf area of the boot of Italy is migrating outward from the land ice not towards it. I've correctly identified a channel that is flowing outward from the land ice and through the broken floating ice blocks but then for some reason I'm showing arrows pointing in. This one may be a bit of semantics as more than 90% of this is correct but I just wanted to point out what could potentially be considered misleading info. I'm pretty sure the rest is correct. |
Above are the obvious Boo-Boo's I can see on my site.
I feel its important for me to leave some of the Boo-Boo's in tact so as to demonstrate the growth and change in knowledge and understanding of Pluto/Charon that I've experienced and not correct all of them. Learning is about taking enough of a risk to put yourself out there in order to discover something and grow from the process.
Some interpret this as me being stupid or dumb, unintelligent, lacking knowledge and I suspect they learn very little in life with their gotta know it from having someone else tell me what to think mentality with their no risk form of learning. Seems NASA has to tell all these scientists or smart people what to think then they all line up with their best versions of what NASA expects. I don't ride the NASA brain train.
I say BAHHHH!!! to that form of uniformity learning.
I can figure out what I think without someone else telling me how or what to think or how to learn.
What have I learned because I didn't follow the main stream science concepts?
I learned how to guesstimate the depth of SP by the size of the floating icebergs on top.
I learned SP is not an impact site its an active geological site.
I learned Viking Tera is a bulge in the land ice.
I learned Peri Planitia is a cooled collapsed underground extension of Viking Tera
I learned how Pluto (all planets) became tilted by gyroscopically induced uneven mass distribution.
I learned the densest part of Pluto is facing towards Charon making SP a negative gravity anomaly (NASA has yet to conclude this)
I learned NASA scientist don't always get it right (i.e.. Wright Mons a cryovolcano).
I learned the spider had a cryovolcano at it center. (NASA hasn't observed this)
I learned how to identify cryovolcanoes. (NASA hasn't)
I learned Wright Mons is not a cryovolcano. (NASA hasn't)
I learned the western edge of SP is speckled with cryovolcanoes. (NASA hasn't)
I learned the southern ridge line has cryovolcanoes spewing gray fluid into tributaries, rivers and lakes. (NASA hasn't)
I learned the core is too small to be radioactively hot at a mere 475km. (contrary to NASA)
I learned there is likely NOT a subsurface ocean of water. (Contrary to NASA)
I learned that SP is a rip in Pluto from which fluids are upwelling (5 months before NASA suggested it).
I learned Callisto and Pluto's densities are the same and Callisto is not considered differentiated at twice Pluto's diameter.
I learned NASA drew a bunch of conclusions about what they would find before they got to Pluto, biasing their view.
I learned that Nix was impacted by an object that was covered in tholin suggesting its youthful age. (waiting on NASA)
I learned 26Al is too old to be active in Pluto's core. (Contrary to NASA)
I learned how misleading models can be.
I learned there is a ridge line running from pole to pole and it is a compression zone with fold mountains. (waiting on NASA)
I learned Pluto/Charon were in an elongated elliptical dance long before their orbits were circular (4 months before NASA).
I learned Pluto/Charon's elliptical dance gave them both a soft underbelly recently initiating their heart beat.
I learned how to explain Charon's southern smooth hemisphere (tidal stretching combined with impacts) (waiting on NASA)
I feel its important for me to leave some of the Boo-Boo's in tact so as to demonstrate the growth and change in knowledge and understanding of Pluto/Charon that I've experienced and not correct all of them. Learning is about taking enough of a risk to put yourself out there in order to discover something and grow from the process.
Some interpret this as me being stupid or dumb, unintelligent, lacking knowledge and I suspect they learn very little in life with their gotta know it from having someone else tell me what to think mentality with their no risk form of learning. Seems NASA has to tell all these scientists or smart people what to think then they all line up with their best versions of what NASA expects. I don't ride the NASA brain train.
I say BAHHHH!!! to that form of uniformity learning.
I can figure out what I think without someone else telling me how or what to think or how to learn.
What have I learned because I didn't follow the main stream science concepts?
I learned how to guesstimate the depth of SP by the size of the floating icebergs on top.
I learned SP is not an impact site its an active geological site.
I learned Viking Tera is a bulge in the land ice.
I learned Peri Planitia is a cooled collapsed underground extension of Viking Tera
I learned how Pluto (all planets) became tilted by gyroscopically induced uneven mass distribution.
I learned the densest part of Pluto is facing towards Charon making SP a negative gravity anomaly (NASA has yet to conclude this)
I learned NASA scientist don't always get it right (i.e.. Wright Mons a cryovolcano).
I learned the spider had a cryovolcano at it center. (NASA hasn't observed this)
I learned how to identify cryovolcanoes. (NASA hasn't)
I learned Wright Mons is not a cryovolcano. (NASA hasn't)
I learned the western edge of SP is speckled with cryovolcanoes. (NASA hasn't)
I learned the southern ridge line has cryovolcanoes spewing gray fluid into tributaries, rivers and lakes. (NASA hasn't)
I learned the core is too small to be radioactively hot at a mere 475km. (contrary to NASA)
I learned there is likely NOT a subsurface ocean of water. (Contrary to NASA)
I learned that SP is a rip in Pluto from which fluids are upwelling (5 months before NASA suggested it).
I learned Callisto and Pluto's densities are the same and Callisto is not considered differentiated at twice Pluto's diameter.
I learned NASA drew a bunch of conclusions about what they would find before they got to Pluto, biasing their view.
I learned that Nix was impacted by an object that was covered in tholin suggesting its youthful age. (waiting on NASA)
I learned 26Al is too old to be active in Pluto's core. (Contrary to NASA)
I learned how misleading models can be.
I learned there is a ridge line running from pole to pole and it is a compression zone with fold mountains. (waiting on NASA)
I learned Pluto/Charon were in an elongated elliptical dance long before their orbits were circular (4 months before NASA).
I learned Pluto/Charon's elliptical dance gave them both a soft underbelly recently initiating their heart beat.
I learned how to explain Charon's southern smooth hemisphere (tidal stretching combined with impacts) (waiting on NASA)
When I use the term "NASA" above, I don't just mean NASA, I mean all scientists that are promoting the NASA driven story line.
So yeah I've made mistakes but making mistakes is worth the cost of being wrong in order to learn something new.
So yeah I've made mistakes but making mistakes is worth the cost of being wrong in order to learn something new.
|
A couple people have rated this site on WOT as inaccurate and not child friendly.
This page was created in support of their assessment. Not child friendly, that makes me laugh. Is there one child that would read this boring material? 99% of the adults I share this info with are bored within 5 minutes. I can see their eyes glaze over as they fight to maintain consciousness while I talk about Pluto. Yep! I've made mistakes too. What can I say? Poo-Poo happens or is it. BooBoo's happen I get em mixed up. Maybe I'm too dumb to know the difference. I tried to tell you on Page 19, I'm dumb, that's my unfair advantage. I don't think like smart people! |
|
|
I'm in a unique position. I don't know any of these smart really nice professional scientists. I don't converse with them. This allows me the freedom to express myself without getting all wrapped up in personal feelings. If I new any of these really smart nice professional people I would be inclined to pull my punches so to speak.
I would be more timid about expressing my ideas. One smart person gave me Alan Sterns email and suggested I use their name (as they know each other) and express some of my thoughts to Alan. While I would love to converse with Alan, after giving it some thought, I decided it would likely restrict my freedom of expression. I try not to be disrespectful when challenging the status quo because I do have the utmost respect for NASA scientists. |
The average interest in Pluto
|
|
I'm not just dumb, I'm isolated and insulated from the need to be careful about what I say. This frees me up to explore wild ideas which can then potentially turn into something new and valid.
If I were respected by and conversing with any of these smart people I would want to align with them or at least not step on their toes. I would then naturally become more timid and would tend to think more about the effect of what I'm saying on their feelings rather than the effect what I'm saying has on my own knowledge. This anonymity, so to speak, also gives me an unfair advantage. When I say I'm dumb and that fact gives me an unfair advantage, I mean it. |
My lack of knowledge and ignorance along with my anonymity has allowed me to explore and question things in a way that wouldn't have been possible if I knew all the mainstream thought processes about Pluto prior to New Horizons' arrival. I get to explore Pluto/Charon with a clean slate unlike my smarter Pluto enthusiast counterparts who already know bunches of scientific stuff. My ignorance sets me free to explore dumb ideas that in the end might turn out not to be so dumb.
I'm dumb and proud of it.
I'm on my own and embrace it (however, I have learned lots and lots from smart people, Thank you).
I make Boo-Boo's and learn from them.
I just had another idea which I just added to page 50 (January 10th, 2017)
According to F. Nimmo, higher temperatures during accretion would evaporate away the ammonia.
If I understand this correctly Charon with surface ammonia would be more likely to have an ocean as ammonia lowers the freezing point of H2O (but Charon's frozen), whereas, Pluto with no signs of ammonia is not likely to have a subsurface ocean. Higher accretion temperatures equal no ammonia. If Pluto is differentiated then it must have been hot enough to separate out silicate rock from rock hard ice, this would have had to occur either during accretion or an impact BUT.
If Pluto collided with Charon creating Pluto's rocky core would this not heat and remove the volatile ammonia that is supposed to create this subsurface ocean of water? If Charon formed out of this collision wouldn't its ammonia also have been removed during this heating event? Yet we see ammonia on Charon suggesting no significant surface heat from a collision and no ammonia on Pluto.
Bill McKinnon uses the presence of ammonia on Charon and a small moon to assume Pluto also has ammonia even though none was detected on Pluto. I use the presence of ammonia on Charon and a small moon to assume my scenario is correct. Why would there be ammonia on Charon but not Pluto if Charon was accreted from the left over stuff from an impact with Pluto and Pluto has no signs of ammonia? If the two never collided then having different compositions makes sense. If Mordor is an impact site then crustal chunks of Charon's ammonia laden surface could have been ejected to become Hydra while shards that hit Pluto did so on the side opposite SP launching ammonia free chunks off SP which may have become Styx and Nix.
This is one of those situations where I get to risk being wrong in order to see how well my theory holds up. I can't wait to find out which small moon has ammonia on it's surface. I'm either potentially wrong on this or my theory continues to build steam. Chew Chew!
I'm dumb and proud of it.
I'm on my own and embrace it (however, I have learned lots and lots from smart people, Thank you).
I make Boo-Boo's and learn from them.
I just had another idea which I just added to page 50 (January 10th, 2017)
According to F. Nimmo, higher temperatures during accretion would evaporate away the ammonia.
If I understand this correctly Charon with surface ammonia would be more likely to have an ocean as ammonia lowers the freezing point of H2O (but Charon's frozen), whereas, Pluto with no signs of ammonia is not likely to have a subsurface ocean. Higher accretion temperatures equal no ammonia. If Pluto is differentiated then it must have been hot enough to separate out silicate rock from rock hard ice, this would have had to occur either during accretion or an impact BUT.
If Pluto collided with Charon creating Pluto's rocky core would this not heat and remove the volatile ammonia that is supposed to create this subsurface ocean of water? If Charon formed out of this collision wouldn't its ammonia also have been removed during this heating event? Yet we see ammonia on Charon suggesting no significant surface heat from a collision and no ammonia on Pluto.
Bill McKinnon uses the presence of ammonia on Charon and a small moon to assume Pluto also has ammonia even though none was detected on Pluto. I use the presence of ammonia on Charon and a small moon to assume my scenario is correct. Why would there be ammonia on Charon but not Pluto if Charon was accreted from the left over stuff from an impact with Pluto and Pluto has no signs of ammonia? If the two never collided then having different compositions makes sense. If Mordor is an impact site then crustal chunks of Charon's ammonia laden surface could have been ejected to become Hydra while shards that hit Pluto did so on the side opposite SP launching ammonia free chunks off SP which may have become Styx and Nix.
This is one of those situations where I get to risk being wrong in order to see how well my theory holds up. I can't wait to find out which small moon has ammonia on it's surface. I'm either potentially wrong on this or my theory continues to build steam. Chew Chew!
Self-Reliance, by Ralph Waldo Emerson
Do I not know that he is pledged to himself not to look but at one side, — the permitted side,....Well, most men have bound their eyes with one or another handkerchief, and attached themselves to some one of these communities of opinion. This conformity makes them not false in a few particulars, authors of a few lies, but false in all particulars. Their every truth is not quite true. Their two is not the real two, their four not the real four; so that every word they say chagrins us, and we know not where to begin to set them right.
Meantime nature is not slow to equip us in the prison-uniform of the party to which we adhere. We come to wear one cut of face and figure, and acquire by degrees the gentlest asinine expression. There is a mortifying experience in particular, which does not fail to wreak itself also in the general history; I mean "the foolish face of praise," the forced smile which we put on in company where we do not feel at ease in answer to conversation which does not interest us. The muscles, not spontaneously moved, but moved by a low usurping willfulness, grow tight about the outline of the face with the most disagreeable sensation.
For nonconformity the world whips you with its displeasure. And therefore a man must know how to estimate a sour face. Yet is the discontent of the multitude more formidable than that of the senate and the college. It is easy enough for a firm man who knows the world to brook the rage of the cultivated classes. Their rage is decorous and prudent, for they are timid as being very vulnerable themselves. But when to their feminine rage the indignation of the people is added, when the ignorant and the poor are aroused, when the unintelligent brute force that lies at the bottom of society is made to growl and mow, it needs the habit of magnanimity and religion to treat it godlike as a trifle of no concernment.
The other terror that scares us from self-trust is our consistency; a reverence for our past act or word, because the eyes of others have no other data for computing our orbit than our past acts, and we are loath to disappoint them..... Suppose you should contradict yourself; what then? It seems to be a rule of wisdom never to rely on your memory alone, scarcely even in acts of pure memory, but to bring the past for judgment into the thousand-eyed present, and live ever in a new day.
A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines. With consistency a great soul has simply nothing to do. He may as well concern himself with his shadow on the wall. Speak what you think now in hard words, and tomorrow speak what tomorrow thinks in hard words again, though it contradict every thing you said to-day. "Ah, so you shall be sure to be misunderstood." Is it so bad, then, to be misunderstood? Pythagoras was misunderstood, and Socrates, and Jesus, and Luther, and Copernicus, and Galileo, and Newton, and every pure and wise spirit that ever took flesh. To be great is to be misunderstood.
There will be an agreement in whatever variety of actions, so they be each honest and natural in their hour. For of one will, the actions will be harmonious, however unlike they seem. These varieties are lost sight of at a little distance, at a little height of thought. One tendency unites them all. The voyage of the best ship is a zigzag line of a hundred tacks. See the line from a sufficient distance, and it straightens itself to the average tendency. Your genuine action will explain itself, and will explain your other genuine actions. Your conformity explains nothing. Act singly, and what you have already done singly will justify you now.
Meantime nature is not slow to equip us in the prison-uniform of the party to which we adhere. We come to wear one cut of face and figure, and acquire by degrees the gentlest asinine expression. There is a mortifying experience in particular, which does not fail to wreak itself also in the general history; I mean "the foolish face of praise," the forced smile which we put on in company where we do not feel at ease in answer to conversation which does not interest us. The muscles, not spontaneously moved, but moved by a low usurping willfulness, grow tight about the outline of the face with the most disagreeable sensation.
For nonconformity the world whips you with its displeasure. And therefore a man must know how to estimate a sour face. Yet is the discontent of the multitude more formidable than that of the senate and the college. It is easy enough for a firm man who knows the world to brook the rage of the cultivated classes. Their rage is decorous and prudent, for they are timid as being very vulnerable themselves. But when to their feminine rage the indignation of the people is added, when the ignorant and the poor are aroused, when the unintelligent brute force that lies at the bottom of society is made to growl and mow, it needs the habit of magnanimity and religion to treat it godlike as a trifle of no concernment.
The other terror that scares us from self-trust is our consistency; a reverence for our past act or word, because the eyes of others have no other data for computing our orbit than our past acts, and we are loath to disappoint them..... Suppose you should contradict yourself; what then? It seems to be a rule of wisdom never to rely on your memory alone, scarcely even in acts of pure memory, but to bring the past for judgment into the thousand-eyed present, and live ever in a new day.
A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines. With consistency a great soul has simply nothing to do. He may as well concern himself with his shadow on the wall. Speak what you think now in hard words, and tomorrow speak what tomorrow thinks in hard words again, though it contradict every thing you said to-day. "Ah, so you shall be sure to be misunderstood." Is it so bad, then, to be misunderstood? Pythagoras was misunderstood, and Socrates, and Jesus, and Luther, and Copernicus, and Galileo, and Newton, and every pure and wise spirit that ever took flesh. To be great is to be misunderstood.
There will be an agreement in whatever variety of actions, so they be each honest and natural in their hour. For of one will, the actions will be harmonious, however unlike they seem. These varieties are lost sight of at a little distance, at a little height of thought. One tendency unites them all. The voyage of the best ship is a zigzag line of a hundred tacks. See the line from a sufficient distance, and it straightens itself to the average tendency. Your genuine action will explain itself, and will explain your other genuine actions. Your conformity explains nothing. Act singly, and what you have already done singly will justify you now.
|
Where NASA scientist and I disagree, you should default to believing them rather than me, I am one dummy, they are many smart people, however, if something smells fishy its your responsibility to investigate and figure out where the stench comes from.
While I say believe their interpretations over mine, I have, however, shown how NASA scientists are not above altering data to obtain their desired outcome. This site is my attempt to present a contrary point of view that makes sense to me. |
|
