Is this SOP at the IPCC?

[MisterBeale]

Politics is all that you have! The science of AGW is unequivocal. If you have some breakthrough that the IPCC doesn't have, let us know what it is. If not we'll go with the science rather than fall for your politics.

Yeah, and the science of Ptolemy was unequivocal. . . that is until Galileo came along. Even then the put him under house arrest. You have no idea the political forces that are behind the ideas you are pushing, nor why they are pushing those ideas. Ptolemy's model explained the Universe just as well as Galileo, it just didn't make any sense to those who had common sense. We are one tiny species on a little planet. You want me to believe that we have the ability to raise the average mean temperature in a matter of centuries or decades, right?

unequivocal my ass . . .

You've already fallen for the global elites politics, but you just aren't aware of it. Their goal is a one world global corporate police state. What better way than to promote global calamities that can only be combated by fake issues that need collectivist action among many nations? Can we think of any that might fit that bill?

Hmmm. . . . How about a made up global terror threats?

How about a made up global AGW threat?

Maybe a global viral epidemiological threat, that would be neat too. . .

You know, if we could get these international bakers to rack up SOOO much fiat currency debt into the system through derivatives and finally crash the whole goddamned system, that would necessitate the introduction of a NEW INTERNATIONAL CURRENCY. . . that would require a global government as well!

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnb4aV1kbZU]The EyeOpener- Chatham House Rules: Inside the Royal Institute of International Affairs - YouTube[/ame]

Delivering Concrete Climate Change Action
Towards 2015
21-22 October 2013
http://www.chathamhouse.org/climate2013

This conference will ask:

What will a global deal in 2015 look like? What are the key components of a shared vision? What elements do developing and developed countries need in order to reach agreement?

How can the emerging international climate change regime – comprising voluntary partnerships, formal negotiations and business coalitions – deliver the necessary reductions in greenhouse gas emissions?

To what extent will new energy realities affect the politics of climate change?

What practical lessons can be learned from existing carbon mitigation and adaptation policies?

How can the international community harness progressive leadership?

Don't tell me that global elites aren't behind this manipulation and that it isn't all political in nature. I'm not an idiot. They fund the Universities through their foundations and grants. They are the ones that decide what "science" is to be done, and why it is to be done. When their "science" is done, they are the ones that control the media and the paradigms of conversation. Any research that points toward it being a natural phenomenon, that isn't going to be published in the corporate owned press, whether it is good science or not. Don't sit there and claim to be the arbiters of what "science" is and what it is not. You do not have the first clue.

On a ticklish little side note. . .

One of my favorite games I own. . . some say they made it with some inside info. Of course, these were made, LONG AGO, in the 90's, before 9/11, before the BP oil spill, before FUKISHIMA, before that Indonesian tsunami, before Obama was elected, Before the earthquakes in Chine, etc. etc. The stuff that is in there? Well, it really illustrates the book of Revelations.

 

[daveman]

Tell us all about what you folks accomplish without thinking and planning. I'm pretty sure that is how lower primates do things.

Your thinking and planning is nothing more than emoting and wishing.

Seriously, kid. That's all you've got.

Thinking people don't insist on blind obedience. Planning people don't insist we do things with absolutely no idea of what the outcome will be.

Your faux superiority schtick is wearing thin, boy. No one's going to agree to your lofty opinion of yourself, despite your petulant foot-stamping.

Now get back to work on your Lego Batcave, Mr. "Engineer".

''Thinking people don't insist on blind obedience.''

Exactly why I have no respect for the speak in one voice conservative cult.

So why do you give the IPCC blind obedience?

Kid, you really SUCK at the internet.

 

[asterism]

The US conservative political cult, led by Rush Limbaugh and others, finds science in the way of the imposition of their politics on the rest of the country. Like the Catholic Church in the years leading up to the Dark Ages, it has become essential in their quest for power for conservatives to disparage education, and science, and science based progress, in order to fuel their world view of society as merely unorganized individuals, living only for themselves.

Fortunately their use of mass media has fallen short of their expectations and our democracy has limited their political influence.

Recovery from the Bush years when their influence peaked, is underway.

By recovery do you mean the unraveling of the doom and gloom predictions of non-stop hurricanes? Or perhaps it's the measurable drop in CO2 emissions due to not natural gas, but alternative fuel technology? And where are all those green jobs that were promised?


I get it. You aren't a scientist, and you aren't even all that competent in the issues of today. You're not even an activist and you get your information from astroturfed sources. Reality plods on without regards to your efforts.


Oh and when you read about an inquiry into the raw data you supposedly said was available? I was one voice of thousands that demanded that it be released.

In fact I'm a engineer and made a very good living solving problems using science.

If you got your science from the IPCC instead of Fox News, and you had the education to understand it, you'd also know the truth.

You choose not to. That’s fine with me. Just don't pretend that your AGW opinions are anything more than what you wish was true.

I and others have posted very real evidence of incompetence in data management and computer programming, and very real evidence of incompetence in selecting IPCC authors.

This is not about politics and it certainly isn't anything I've gotten from Fox News.

I really think you just don't have the capacity to understand the problems caused by amateurs writing code.

 

[asterism]

Politics is all that you have!

That's false. There are serious issues with the methodology used by the early group of scientists that "proved" Anthropogenic Global Warming. Namely, that they did not have any expertise in data and software.

There are serious issues with the vetting of IPCC "Scientists." Many of them were not Scientists when they were hired.

There are serious issues with the IPCC standards, with non peer-reviewed studies being admitted into the reports.

There are serious issues with peer-review in the field Climatology. It has become "pal-review" in some instances and it has become almost dogmatic in collusion to deny publication on the basis of the conclusion instead of the merit of the work. There has even been an effort to pressure a publication for accepting studies not approved by certain individuals.

The science of AGW is unequivocal. If you have some breakthrough that the IPCC doesn't have, let us know what it is. If not we'll go with the science rather than fall for your politics.

I have nothing new, others have done a fine job at documenting the issues with the IPCC and some of the influential people involved.

If you have nothing new, or nothing to add to the science, why do you default to conspiracy theories?

Not conspiracy theories, incompetence.

 

[PMZ]

Politics is all that you have! The science of AGW is unequivocal. If you have some breakthrough that the IPCC doesn't have, let us know what it is. If not we'll go with the science rather than fall for your politics.

Yeah, and the science of Ptolemy was unequivocal. . . that is until Galileo came along. Even then the put him under house arrest. You have no idea the political forces that are behind the ideas you are pushing, nor why they are pushing those ideas. Ptolemy's model explained the Universe just as well as Galileo, it just didn't make any sense to those who had common sense. We are one tiny species on a little planet. You want me to believe that we have the ability to raise the average mean temperature in a matter of centuries or decades, right?

unequivocal my ass . . .

You've already fallen for the global elites politics, but you just aren't aware of it. Their goal is a one world global corporate police state. What better way than to promote global calamities that can only be combated by fake issues that need collectivist action among many nations? Can we think of any that might fit that bill?

Hmmm. . . . How about a made up global terror threats?

How about a made up global AGW threat?

Maybe a global viral epidemiological threat, that would be neat too. . .

You know, if we could get these international bakers to rack up SOOO much fiat currency debt into the system through derivatives and finally crash the whole goddamned system, that would necessitate the introduction of a NEW INTERNATIONAL CURRENCY. . . that would require a global government as well!

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnb4aV1kbZU]The EyeOpener- Chatham House Rules: Inside the Royal Institute of International Affairs - YouTube[/ame]

Delivering Concrete Climate Change Action
Towards 2015
21-22 October 2013
http://www.chathamhouse.org/climate2013

This conference will ask:

What will a global deal in 2015 look like? What are the key components of a shared vision? What elements do developing and developed countries need in order to reach agreement?

How can the emerging international climate change regime – comprising voluntary partnerships, formal negotiations and business coalitions – deliver the necessary reductions in greenhouse gas emissions?

To what extent will new energy realities affect the politics of climate change?

What practical lessons can be learned from existing carbon mitigation and adaptation policies?

How can the international community harness progressive leadership?

Don't tell me that global elites aren't behind this manipulation and that it isn't all political in nature. I'm not an idiot. They fund the Universities through their foundations and grants. They are the ones that decide what "science" is to be done, and why it is to be done. When their "science" is done, they are the ones that control the media and the paradigms of conversation. Any research that points toward it being a natural phenomenon, that isn't going to be published in the corporate owned press, whether it is good science or not. Don't sit there and claim to be the arbiters of what "science" is and what it is not. You do not have the first clue.

On a ticklish little side note. . .

One of my favorite games I own. . . some say they made it with some inside info. Of course, these were made, LONG AGO, in the 90's, before 9/11, before the BP oil spill, before FUKISHIMA, before that Indonesian tsunami, before Obama was elected, Before the earthquakes in Chine, etc. etc. The stuff that is in there? Well, it really illustrates the book of Revelations.

Science has had enemies throughout history. The uneducated, the tyrants, the church, the conservatives. Today is no different. The truth of science gets in the way of the powerful becoming more so.

Fortunately for humanity, knowledge always triumphs over ignorance. Progress is sometimes slowed by tyranny but never stopped.

This skirmish is no different. It might sound louder due to the modern communications technology invented by science, but the conservative demand for more ignorance and less government in the world is already getting booted from government and by 2016 I predict it will be as thoroughly defeated as communism has been. And history will record it as self inflicted.

 

[PMZ]

Your thinking and planning is nothing more than emoting and wishing.

Seriously, kid. That's all you've got.

Thinking people don't insist on blind obedience. Planning people don't insist we do things with absolutely no idea of what the outcome will be.

Your faux superiority schtick is wearing thin, boy. No one's going to agree to your lofty opinion of yourself, despite your petulant foot-stamping.

Now get back to work on your Lego Batcave, Mr. "Engineer".

''Thinking people don't insist on blind obedience.''

Exactly why I have no respect for the speak in one voice conservative cult.

So why do you give the IPCC blind obedience?

Kid, you really SUCK at the internet.

I give science unquestioned allegiance. It is the only of mankind's pursuits that uncovers certain truth.

 

[daveman]

''Thinking people don't insist on blind obedience.''

Exactly why I have no respect for the speak in one voice conservative cult.

So why do you give the IPCC blind obedience?

Kid, you really SUCK at the internet.

I give science unquestioned allegiance. It is the only of mankind's pursuits that uncovers certain truth.

You give the IPCC blind obedience. All the posts linking to corruption and incompetence by its members, and you still insist on defending it.

Cultist.

 

[MisterBeale]

I give science unquestioned allegiance. It is the only of mankind's pursuits that uncovers certain truth.

Tell me, any idea what epistemology is?

 

[daveman]

I give science unquestioned allegiance. It is the only of mankind's pursuits that uncovers certain truth.

Tell me, any idea what epistemology is?

That's what the OB/GYN does to a mommy's lady parts when she has a baby, right?

/PMZ

 

[PMZ]

That's false. There are serious issues with the methodology used by the early group of scientists that "proved" Anthropogenic Global Warming. Namely, that they did not have any expertise in data and software.

There are serious issues with the vetting of IPCC "Scientists." Many of them were not Scientists when they were hired.

There are serious issues with the IPCC standards, with non peer-reviewed studies being admitted into the reports.

There are serious issues with peer-review in the field Climatology. It has become "pal-review" in some instances and it has become almost dogmatic in collusion to deny publication on the basis of the conclusion instead of the merit of the work. There has even been an effort to pressure a publication for accepting studies not approved by certain individuals.

I have nothing new, others have done a fine job at documenting the issues with the IPCC and some of the influential people involved.

If you have nothing new, or nothing to add to the science, why do you default to conspiracy theories?

Not conspiracy theories, incompetence.

Let me fully absorb that. You are calling the IPCC incompetent at science. The irony of that is breathtaking.

 

[PMZ]

I give science unquestioned allegiance. It is the only of mankind's pursuits that uncovers certain truth.

Tell me, any idea what epistemology is?

I see that you don't believe in science and obviously do believe in politics.

'Nuff said.

 

[PMZ]

So why do you give the IPCC blind obedience?

Kid, you really SUCK at the internet.

I give science unquestioned allegiance. It is the only of mankind's pursuits that uncovers certain truth.

You give the IPCC blind obedience. All the posts linking to corruption and incompetence by its members, and you still insist on defending it.

Cultist.

I haven't seen one post that proves in any way corruption. What I've seen are conspiracy theories aimed at discrediting the biggest obstacle to conservatives imposing what is best for them on the rest of the world. It's probably the world’s oldest and dirtiest political trick.

 

[PMZ]

I give science unquestioned allegiance. It is the only of mankind's pursuits that uncovers certain truth.

Tell me, any idea what epistemology is?

Are you in the wrong forum? This is environmental not perversion.

 

[daveman]

I give science unquestioned allegiance. It is the only of mankind's pursuits that uncovers certain truth.

You give the IPCC blind obedience. All the posts linking to corruption and incompetence by its members, and you still insist on defending it.

Cultist.

I haven't seen one post that proves in any way corruption. What I've seen are conspiracy theories aimed at discrediting the biggest obstacle to conservatives imposing what is best for them on the rest of the world. It's probably the world’s oldest and dirtiest political trick.

Whatever, you Westboro Climate Church fundamentalist freak.

I'm through with you. You're utterly impervious to fact and logic. You've wasted too much of my time already, boy, although I do appreciate the opportunity you've given me to start the threads I have. It's allowed me to expose the failures and corruption of the IPCC and the complete inaccuracy of the models they base their crap "science" on.

Normal people have read and considered my posts.

Closed-minded zealots like you have ignored reality.

 

[MisterBeale]

Science has had enemies throughout history. The uneducated, the tyrants, the church, the conservatives. Today is no different. The truth of science gets in the way of the powerful becoming more so.

Fortunately for humanity, knowledge always triumphs over ignorance. Progress is sometimes slowed by tyranny but never stopped.

This skirmish is no different. It might sound louder due to the modern communications technology invented by science, but the conservative demand for more ignorance and less government in the world is already getting booted from government and by 2016 I predict it will be as thoroughly defeated as communism has been. And history will record it as self inflicted.

You don't see the irony in your rant, do you? You sit here tilting at windmills, blind to what I have posted, believing in the false dichotomy, or the false dilemma. It has nothing to do with left/right, or conservative/liberal politics. It has to do with CONTROL. Just as the Church was the control mechanism during the enlightenment, education and government are the control systems now.

Sure, science is great, we can agree on that. But science is made to SERVE the interests of government, of the elites. As long as it is used as a tool for the powerful elites, it is biased. As long as corporations USE government for the profit making and social control making end, in collusion with the government, science will not be free.

Listen, this is a NEW AGE. We have the internet now. There is now no longer any excuse to live in the dark age or old. When really, the time period from the last scientific renaissance, to the time of the internet, the elites learned how to tightly control the flow of information to the middle class. YOU are still a victim. If we can watch our TV's and go to Universities and KNOW they are lying to us about the antiquities around the world at this point, what good is their so called science? Any thinking man now knows their control of science is for the elites use only. They will let YOU know what truth is, and what it is not. As long it is for THEIR agenda.

Did they ever tell you that Pi, Phi, and the Speed of Light are encoded in The Great Pyramid?

This single, fundamental design principle: 11 : 7 Base to Height Ratio generates ALL amazing mathematical properties of the Great Pyramid:

the Golden Ratio Phi=1.618 (the Great Pyramid is a Golden Pyramid: length of the slope side (356) divided by half of the side (440/2 = 220) height is equal to 1.6181818… which is the Golden Ratio Phi
squaring the circle ratio 1.571 (base/height = 44/28 = 1.571)
pi=3.14159… (2 x base/height = 2 x 44/28 = 3.14286 which is very close approximation of “pi” = 3.14159&#8230
Perimeter of the square base, 4×440=1760, is the same as circumference of the circle with radius = height: 2x ”pi” x height (2x 22/7 x 280=1760)
The ratio of the perimeter to height of 1760/280 cubits equates to 2x pi
to an accuracy of better than 0.05%
Side of the base (440) plus double height (2x 280=560) = 1,000
Perimeter of the square base is equal 4×440=1760 RC = 0.5 nautical mile = 1/7,200th of the radius length of the earth
the slop angle 51°.843
The Pyramid exhibits in the design both pi and by Phi, given the similarity
of 2/ sqrt(phi) (2 divided by the square root of Phi) with pi/2 :

11/ 7 equal 1.5714
2/ sqrt(89/55) equal 1.5722
2/ sqrt(Phi) equal 1.5723
pi/ 2 equal 1.5708

Royal Cubit = 0.5236 m, pi – Phi2 = 0.5231
and more…

Does Great Pyramid encode “fractal” value of the speed of light?

The speed of light in a vacuum is 299, 792, 458 meters per second or 983,571,056.43045 feet per second or 186,282.397 miles per second.

Base of the Great Pyramid is a square with side B = 44o Royal Egyptian Cubits. Let’s draw two circles: one inscribed and one superscribed on the square of the base of the Great Pyramid.

Circumference of superscribed circle: 2x pi x R
Circumference of the inscribed circle: 2x pi x r

The difference of the circumference of both circles (lets call it C) is:

C = 2 x pi x (R – r) = 2 x pi x [ B/sqrt(2) - B/2 ] =
2x pi x B x [ 1/sqrt(2) - 1/2 ] = 1.301290285 x B
The length of the Egyptian Royal Cubit

Based on “The Pyramids and Temples of Gizeh” by W.M. Flinders Petrie. 1883.

The unit of measuring length used by the ancient architects in the construction of the Great Pyramid was the Royal Cubit.

Petrie estimated the value of the Royal Cubit using some key dimensions of the Great Pyramid:
By the base length of the Pyramid, if 440 cubits (section ’43): 20.611 ± .002
By the base of King’s Chamber, corrected for opening of joints: 20.632 ± .004 inches
By the Queen’s Chamber, if dimensions squared are in square cubits: 20.61 ± .020
By the antechamber: 20.58 ± .020
By the ascending and Queen’s Chamber passage lengths (section 149): 20.622 ± .002
By the gallery width: 20.605 ± .032

The Average value of the RC (based on above numbers) is 20.61 inches.

It’s almost universally accepted that archaeologist Flinders Petrie’s determination of the royal cubit length at 20.632 inches, from his measurements of the King’s Chamber in the Great Pyramid of Giza, was the likely measure to survey the dimensions of that pyramid, 440 royal cubits per base side, but the experts stop there, not then letting you know that those 1,760 royal cubits which total the Great Pyramid’s base perimeter length, when multiplied by 20.632 inches, equals half a modern nautical mile, or 1/7,200th of the radius length of the earth, so there certainly is a connection.

By most accurate series of measurements Petrie concluded that the royal cubit standard for the Great Pyramid was 20.620 ± .005 inches ( 523.7 mm).

Let’s use the lower value 20.615 ” for the Royal Cubit (allowed by the 0.005 ” accuracy):

the Royal Egyptian Cubit (RC) is 20.615 ” = 0.523621 m

B = 440RC = 9070.6″ = 755.883 feet = 230.393 m

Therefore C = 1.301290285 x B = 983.6 feet = 299.8 m

The value of C x 106 is surprisingly very close to
the speed of light in m/s

The speed of light in a vacuum is
983, 571, 056.43 feet per second =
299, 792, 458 meters per second.

So, since the Earth's circumference, Pi, Phi, and the speed of light are all encoded into the Great Pyramid, and we really have no accurate way of measuring the age of this monument, what does this REALLY tell us about what mainstream University science is letting the public know about our reality?

It would seem we could make a few hypothesis, couldn't we? Perhaps at one time there was a very advanced Global civilization that once inhabited the Earth. Perhaps at one time mankind was in contact with an off world intelligence. Or, perhaps at one time mankind was in regular contact with non-corporeal beings.

One thing is for sure. The science of the elites do know things that they don't readily disseminate to the world's population, and if you want to know about them, it is incumbent upon YOU TO DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH. You shouldn't just bow down to these so called high priests of "science," because it is very likely they will corrupt the faith.

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAeyO1FzgDk"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAeyO1FzgDk[/ame]

Watch it before it disappears.

 

[PMZ]

You give the IPCC blind obedience. All the posts linking to corruption and incompetence by its members, and you still insist on defending it.

Cultist.

I haven't seen one post that proves in any way corruption. What I've seen are conspiracy theories aimed at discrediting the biggest obstacle to conservatives imposing what is best for them on the rest of the world. It's probably the world’s oldest and dirtiest political trick.

Whatever, you Westboro Climate Church fundamentalist freak.

I'm through with you. You're utterly impervious to fact and logic. You've wasted too much of my time already, boy, although I do appreciate the opportunity you've given me to start the threads I have. It's allowed me to expose the failures and corruption of the IPCC and the complete inaccuracy of the models they base their crap "science" on.

Normal people have read and considered my posts.

Closed-minded zealots like you have ignored reality.

Normal people????

That's the joke of the night. How would you even know normal?

 

[MisterBeale]

I give science unquestioned allegiance. It is the only of mankind's pursuits that uncovers certain truth.

Tell me, any idea what epistemology is?

I see that you don't believe in science and obviously do believe in politics.

'Nuff said.

You were the one that said you believed that "science" was the only way to arrive at certain truth. Well, if you don't even know what epistemology is, it is clear you don't understand the nature of truth, nor have you studied what the nature of truth really is.

Epistemology
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemology

Epistemology (Listeni/ɨˌpɪstɨˈmɒlədʒi/ from Greek ἐπιστήμη - epistēmē, meaning "knowledge, understanding", and λόγος - logos, meaning "study of") is the branch of philosophy concerned with the nature and scope of knowledge[1][2] and is also referred to as "theory of knowledge". It questions what knowledge is and how it can be acquired, and the extent to which knowledge pertinent to any given subject or entity can be acquired.

Much of the debate in this field has focused on analyzing the nature of knowledge and how it relates to connected notions such as truth, belief, and justification.

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQB2cKVk7lE"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQB2cKVk7lE[/ame]

What we are saying PMZ is that your epistemology sucks. Your epistemology is being controlled by the wrong people, you are being fed, "pseudo-truths."

'Nuff said.

 

[PMZ]

Science has had enemies throughout history. The uneducated, the tyrants, the church, the conservatives. Today is no different. The truth of science gets in the way of the powerful becoming more so.

Fortunately for humanity, knowledge always triumphs over ignorance. Progress is sometimes slowed by tyranny but never stopped.

This skirmish is no different. It might sound louder due to the modern communications technology invented by science, but the conservative demand for more ignorance and less government in the world is already getting booted from government and by 2016 I predict it will be as thoroughly defeated as communism has been. And history will record it as self inflicted.

You don't see the irony in your rant, do you? You sit here tilting at windmills, blind to what I have posted, believing in the false dichotomy, or the false dilemma. It has nothing to do with left/right, or conservative/liberal politics. It has to do with CONTROL. Just as the Church was the control mechanism during the enlightenment, education and government are the control systems now.

Sure, science is great, we can agree on that. But science is made to SERVE the interests of government, of the elites. As long as it is used as a tool for the powerful elites, it is biased. As long as corporations USE government for the profit making and social control making end, in collusion with the government, science will not be free.

Listen, this is a NEW AGE. We have the internet now. There is now no longer any excuse to live in the dark age or old. When really, the time period from the last scientific renaissance, to the time of the internet, the elites learned how to tightly control the flow of information to the middle class. YOU are still a victim. If we can watch our TV's and go to Universities and KNOW they are lying to us about the antiquities around the world at this point, what good is their so called science? Any thinking man now knows their control of science is for the elites use only. They will let YOU know what truth is, and what it is not. As long it is for THEIR agenda.

Did they ever tell you that Pi, Phi, and the Speed of Light are encoded in The Great Pyramid?

This single, fundamental design principle: 11 : 7 Base to Height Ratio generates ALL amazing mathematical properties of the Great Pyramid:

the Golden Ratio Phi=1.618 (the Great Pyramid is a Golden Pyramid: length of the slope side (356) divided by half of the side (440/2 = 220) height is equal to 1.6181818… which is the Golden Ratio Phi
squaring the circle ratio 1.571 (base/height = 44/28 = 1.571)
pi=3.14159… (2 x base/height = 2 x 44/28 = 3.14286 which is very close approximation of “pi” = 3.14159…)
Perimeter of the square base, 4×440=1760, is the same as circumference of the circle with radius = height: 2x ”pi” x height (2x 22/7 x 280=1760)
The ratio of the perimeter to height of 1760/280 cubits equates to 2x pi
to an accuracy of better than 0.05%
Side of the base (440) plus double height (2x 280=560) = 1,000
Perimeter of the square base is equal 4×440=1760 RC = 0.5 nautical mile = 1/7,200th of the radius length of the earth
the slop angle 51°.843
The Pyramid exhibits in the design both pi and by Phi, given the similarity
of 2/ sqrt(phi) (2 divided by the square root of Phi) with pi/2 :

11/ 7 equal 1.5714
2/ sqrt(89/55) equal 1.5722
2/ sqrt(Phi) equal 1.5723
pi/ 2 equal 1.5708

Royal Cubit = 0.5236 m, pi – Phi2 = 0.5231
and more…

Does Great Pyramid encode “fractal” value of the speed of light?

The speed of light in a vacuum is 299, 792, 458 meters per second or 983,571,056.43045 feet per second or 186,282.397 miles per second.

Base of the Great Pyramid is a square with side B = 44o Royal Egyptian Cubits. Let’s draw two circles: one inscribed and one superscribed on the square of the base of the Great Pyramid.

Circumference of superscribed circle: 2x pi x R
Circumference of the inscribed circle: 2x pi x r

The difference of the circumference of both circles (lets call it C) is:

C = 2 x pi x (R – r) = 2 x pi x [ B/sqrt(2) - B/2 ] =
2x pi x B x [ 1/sqrt(2) - 1/2 ] = 1.301290285 x B
The length of the Egyptian Royal Cubit

Based on “The Pyramids and Temples of Gizeh” by W.M. Flinders Petrie. 1883.

The unit of measuring length used by the ancient architects in the construction of the Great Pyramid was the Royal Cubit.

Petrie estimated the value of the Royal Cubit using some key dimensions of the Great Pyramid:
By the base length of the Pyramid, if 440 cubits (section ’43): 20.611 ± .002
By the base of King’s Chamber, corrected for opening of joints: 20.632 ± .004 inches
By the Queen’s Chamber, if dimensions squared are in square cubits: 20.61 ± .020
By the antechamber: 20.58 ± .020
By the ascending and Queen’s Chamber passage lengths (section 149): 20.622 ± .002
By the gallery width: 20.605 ± .032

The Average value of the RC (based on above numbers) is 20.61 inches.

It’s almost universally accepted that archaeologist Flinders Petrie’s determination of the royal cubit length at 20.632 inches, from his measurements of the King’s Chamber in the Great Pyramid of Giza, was the likely measure to survey the dimensions of that pyramid, 440 royal cubits per base side, but the experts stop there, not then letting you know that those 1,760 royal cubits which total the Great Pyramid’s base perimeter length, when multiplied by 20.632 inches, equals half a modern nautical mile, or 1/7,200th of the radius length of the earth, so there certainly is a connection.

By most accurate series of measurements Petrie concluded that the royal cubit standard for the Great Pyramid was 20.620 ± .005 inches ( 523.7 mm).

Let’s use the lower value 20.615 ” for the Royal Cubit (allowed by the 0.005 ” accuracy):

the Royal Egyptian Cubit (RC) is 20.615 ” = 0.523621 m

B = 440RC = 9070.6″ = 755.883 feet = 230.393 m

Therefore C = 1.301290285 x B = 983.6 feet = 299.8 m

The value of C x 106 is surprisingly very close to
the speed of light in m/s

The speed of light in a vacuum is
983, 571, 056.43 feet per second =
299, 792, 458 meters per second.

So, since the Earth's circumference, Pi, Phi, and the speed of light are all encoded into the Great Pyramid, and we really have no accurate way of measuring the age oh this monument, what does this REALLY tell us about what mainstream University science is letting the public know about our reality?

It would seem we could make a few hypothesis, couldn't we? Perhaps at one time there was a very advanced Global civilization that once inhabited the Earth. Perhaps at one time mankind was in contact with an off world intelligence. Or, perhaps at one time mankind was in regular contact with non-corporeal beings.

One thing is for sure. The science of the elites do know things that they don't readily disseminate to the world's population, and if you want to know about them, it is incumbent upon YOU TO YOUR OWN RESEARCH. You shouldn't just bow down to these so called high priests of "science," because it is very likely they will corrupt the faith.

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAeyO1FzgDk"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAeyO1FzgDk[/ame]

Watch it before it disappears.

There are conspiracy theorists and there are those obsessed.

I have known, and still know, many scientists. I made my living applying what they learned to the real world.

I have also known many politicians, both professional and amateur.

Comparing the two groups is easy. Scientists are obsessed with the search for truth. That's all they care about. To uncover what's previously unknown.

Politicians are obsessed with getting their way. They usually disguise that as getting our way, them and their supporters.

So when folks who are at their core trying get to get their way, try to discredit truth seekers, my antennae go up.

Cheap dirty politics.

 

[PMZ]

Tell me, any idea what epistemology is?

I see that you don't believe in science and obviously do believe in politics.

'Nuff said.

You were the one that said you believed that "science" was the only way to arrive at certain truth. Well, if you don't even know what epistemology is, it is clear you don't understand the nature of truth, nor have you studied what the nature of truth really is.

Epistemology
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemology

Epistemology (Listeni/ɨˌpɪstɨˈmɒlədʒi/ from Greek ἐπιστήμη - epistēmē, meaning "knowledge, understanding", and λόγος - logos, meaning "study of") is the branch of philosophy concerned with the nature and scope of knowledge[1][2] and is also referred to as "theory of knowledge". It questions what knowledge is and how it can be acquired, and the extent to which knowledge pertinent to any given subject or entity can be acquired.

Much of the debate in this field has focused on analyzing the nature of knowledge and how it relates to connected notions such as truth, belief, and justification.

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQB2cKVk7lE"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQB2cKVk7lE[/ame]

What we are saying PMZ is that your epistemology sucks. Your epistemology is being controlled by the wrong people, you are being fed, "pseudo-truths."

'Nuff said.

Wouldn't you think that such a big deal would leave behind some evidence?

The wrong people? You're saying that if I was smarter I'd follow conservative political entertainers rather than science and scientists?

We're going to have to violently disagree on that. Truth vs what some group wishes was true.

Easy choice for me.

 

[westwall]

If you have nothing new, or nothing to add to the science, why do you default to conspiracy theories?

Not conspiracy theories, incompetence.

Let me fully absorb that. You are calling the IPCC incompetent at science. The irony of that is breathtaking.

Really? Care to show us something they've been correct about? I'll wait....