The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewLarry Romanoff Archive
A Few Historical Frauds
Einstein, Bell & Edison, Coca-Cola and the Wright Brothers
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

There are only two nations in the world whose existence seems to be founded primarily on historical myths. In the US, false historical mythology permeates every nook and cranny of the American psyche, the result of more than 100 years of astonishing and unconscionable programming and propaganda, a massive crime against an entire population. This condition pertains not only to past events we think of as history, but to the extent that most items permitting Americans to “feel good by being an American” are fabricated Disney fairytales. This essay is a brief introduction to only a minor aspect of this subject.

In the introduction to my series of books (soon to be published) I wrote that “Perhaps 90%, or even 95%, of everything we know, or think that we know, or that we believe to be true about history, is wrong. To express this another way, if we were to take the history of the entire world for the past 500 years and compress it into a book of 100 pages, a full 50 of those pages would be blank. That is the extent to which our true history has been suppressed, entirely deleted from the record and from our consciousness. Of the remaining 50 pages, 45 are false in whole or in part, photoshopped, sanitised, twisted, and with critical details omitted to deliberately lead the public to the wrong conclusions.”[1]Jim Quinn: A Nation Built On Lies; https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-07-10/jim-quinn-...part-2

Einstein, the Mythical Genius

One of the greatest mythical frauds in history is that of Albert Einstein, the famous physicist who invented the Theory of Relativity, E=mc² and so many other esoteric things. But this is all fabrication. The claims about Einstein inventing any theory of relativity, or light and photons, or time, are false. Almost every claim – almost everything – attributed to Einstein is simply a lie. Einstein was an inept who contributed nothing original to the field of quantum mechanics, nor any other science. Far from being a competent physicist, he once even flatly denied that the atom could be split and, much later, admitted that the idea of a chain reaction in fissile material “had never occurred to me”.[2]Einstein’s Plagiarism of the General Theory of Relativity 1st Edition; by Christopher Jon Bjerknes; https://www.amazon.com/Einsteins-Plagiarism-General-...900872[3]Einstein A Plagiarist Special Relativity; https://educheer.com/term-paper/einstein-a-plagiaris...tivity

Einstein was a third-class clerk at the government patent office in Bern, and never progressed beyond this level even with years of experience. By all contemporary reports, Einstein wasn’t even an accomplished mathematician. It has been well documented that much of the mathematical content of Einstein’s so-called theories were well beyond his ability. Walter Isaacson, president of the Aspen Institute, stated that Einstein’s first wife Mileva Marić was a “Serbian physicist who had helped him with (his) math . . .”[4]Time magazine, July 2006; http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,12...00.htm Other prominent scientists have made the claim that his wife did most of his math for him.

Henri Poincaré was the foremost expert on relativity in the late 19th century and the first person to formally present the theories, having published more than 30 books and over 500 papers on the topics. Extensive documentation exists that Einstein and his associates had studied Poincaré’s theories and mathematics for years, yet when Einstein published his almost wholly-plagiarised versions he made no reference whatever to these other works.

In the accepted historical account, Einstein is credited with having written the correct field equations for general relativity, an enormous falsehood. It is an undisputed fact that David Hilbert sent Einstein a draft of his work (which had already been submitted for publication), containing precisely these equations, evidenced by the existence of a letter from Einstein to Hilbert thanking him for doing so. Yet a few weeks later, Einstein delivered a public speech of Hilbert’s work, claiming full credit for the derivation of Hilbert’s equations. Similarly, E=mc², the famous equation relating mass, energy, and the speed of light, had been published several times by Italian physicist Olinto De Pretto, long before Einstein was suddenly given credit for it. In multiple thorough reviews of scientific literature, prominent scientists have unanimously stated that there is “absolutely nothing to connect Einstein to the derivation of this formula.”[5]The Guardian, November 11, 1999; “Einstein’s E=mc² was Italian’s idea”; Clark, R. W. [1984], Einstein: The Life and Times, Avon Books, New York. De Pretto, O. [1904], ‘Ipo tesi dell ” et ere nell a vita dell ” universe’, Reale Istituto Veneto di Scienze, Lettere ed Arti, Feb.

Einstein’s papers, theories, mathematics, documentation, were almost 100% plagiarised from others. He combined the prior published works of several people into one paper and claimed ownership of all of it. His so-called theories were nothing more than a composition encompassing the prior work of men like James Maxwell, Hendrik Lorentz, Joseph Larmor, Olinto De Pretto, Robert Brown, Ludwig Boltzmann, Friedrich Hasenöhrl, and many more.

In a paper he wrote in 1907, in part responding to (already-virulent) accusations of plagiarism, Einstein declared that plagiarism was perfectly acceptable as a form of ethical research, stating “… the nature [of physics is] that what follows has already been partly solved by other authors. I am [therefore] entitled to leave out a thoroughly pedantic survey of the literature…”[6]http://www.cartesio-episteme.net/episteme/epi6/ep6-...ec.htm[7]https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/esp_einstein.htm[8]https://www.veteranstoday.com/2020/01/02/was-einstei...icist/ In other words, scientists all build on each others’ work, so Einstein could freely compile the work of everyone before him and re-present it as his own, with no obligation to even mention them or their work. His view of ethical science was like building a tower where each person adds one stone and, if I add the last stone, I not only take credit for the entire design and construction of the tower, but I own the building.

Perhaps the most damning evidence was when in 1953 Sir Edmund Whittaker published a very detailed account of the origin and development of all these theories and equations of physics, with extensive reference to the primary sources, documenting beyond doubt that Einstein had no priority in any of it, and clearly stating so. Einstein was alive and well when Whittaker published his book, yet he offered no dispute to the conclusions, no refutation of Whittaker’s claim that he (Einstein) had been irrelevant to the entire process. Einstein made no attempts in his own defense but simply hid in the bushes and refused to make any public comment whatever.[9]A history of the theories of aether and electricity: https://archive.org/details/historyoftheorie00whitrich

Einstein was almost certainly the greatest fraud and plagiarist in modern science, an unashamed intellectual thief but, according to sources like Wikipedia, this is all just a minor “priority dispute” about who said what first in the realm of relativity physics. These sources misleadingly imply that several people made a discovery independently and more or less simultaneously, and we are simply debating who went public first. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Wikipedia is renowned as being virtually useless as an information source due to widespread ideological bias and censorship.

Einstein was Jewish and had the support of the Jewish-controlled media who conspired to create yet another historical myth. His fame and popularity today, his status as a hero of the scientific world, are due only to decades of a well-planned force-feeding of the Einstein myth to the masses by the media. The propaganda machine simply airbrushed out of the history books all the physicists who formulated these theories, and credited everything to Einstein. Without the extravagant generations-long PR and propaganda campaign, Einstein would have remained in the dustbin of obscurity where he belongs.

There are many Einstein apologists who produce reams of heavily-documented irrelevancies masquerading as proof, items such as a schoolmate who claimed “the flight of his mathematical genius was so high that I could no longer follow.” Many scientists and scientific historians know the truth of all this, and the accurate historical record is readily available, but many appear afraid to speak out for fear of damaging their careers. I have put the question to several prominent physicists in different countries, eliciting similar responses, namely that “it will not further one’s career to open a debate which will inevitably produce a tsunami of invective and slander, to say nothing of accusations of anti-Semitism.”

Time Magazine published more than a dozen issues on Einstein, including a special Collector’s Edition, and even ran an issue naming Einstein the “Person of the Century”. As with all other American heroes, the PR machine has worked for decades to embellish the myth with a collection of possibly hundreds of wise sayings attributed to this man where there is absolutely no historical evidence he ever said any of those things. The NYT published an article on a small cleverly-selected scientific dispute, in which it claimed “Findings Back Einstein in a Plagiarism Dispute”.[10]Findings Back Einstein In a Plagiarism Dispute; https://www.nytimes.com/1997/11/18/science/findings-...e.html And thus is history spun by those who control the microphone. This is why so many pages in our history book consist of misrepresentations and omitted facts, painting a picture so considerably at odds with the truth. As with Thomas Edison, Alexander Graham Bell, the Wright Brothers and so many others, the false historical myths have been so deeply entwined in American and world history that they cannot be unraveled.

Einstein, the “Man of Peace”

Similarly, there has been a great campaign by Einstein’s revisionist apologists to disavow his strong support for the development of the atomic bomb, claiming him to be “a man of peace”. I have copies of correspondence from Einstein where he stated his conviction that the United States should “demonstrate” the atomic bomb to disfavored foreign countries. In one letter to then-US President Roosevelt, he wrote, “… extremely powerful bombs of a new type may thus be constructed. A single bomb of this type, carried by boat and exploded in a port, might very well destroy the whole port together with some of the surrounding territory. I am convinced as to the wisdom and the urgency of creating the conditions under which that and related work can be carried out with greater speed and on a larger scale than hitherto”.[11]Photo included:

That statement is part of one of Einstein’s letter to Roosevelt, suggesting he (Einstein) be “entrusted with the task” of managing the project. Roosevelt refused Einstein’s fervent requests to manage, or even to participate in, the project, because it was an open secret that nobody trusted him and the FBI had conducted extensive investigations against him. One FBI file labeled “Secret”, stated that Einstein was affiliated with 33 organisations which had been cited by the Attorney-General and/or Congress, as being politically suspect.

It is interesting that the respected National Geographic is one of the world’s worst publications for spinning historical fact and truth. In 2017, this magazine ran an article on Einstein claiming that Hoover and the FBI despised Einstein and built a 1,400-page file on him because “the world-famous physicist was outspoken against nuclear bombs”.[12]https://www.nationalgeographic.com/news/2017/04/scie...ience/[13]https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2002/09/eins-s03.html

The second portion of the same letter is rather more disturbing, and has to my knowledge never been publicly referenced anywhere. It clearly reveals that Einstein had had detailed discussions with some wealthy acquaintances in Europe who were eager to personally finance the US development of atomic bombs from their own pockets. Einstein was informing the President he had access to these individuals with whom he had already confirmed available funding, baiting Roosevelt with an offer that, should he be ‘entrusted’ with management of the bomb project, he could bring the necessary financing with him. He states that, as project manager, one of his tasks would be: “providing funds … through his contacts with private persons who are willing to make contributions for this cause.”[14]Photo included:

It would be appropriate for us to ask who were these “private persons” who had the money to finance the development of the world’s first atomic bombs, and why they would want to personally fund such a project. Einstein does not mention these individuals by name, but they would surely have been Jewish and who in Europe (in the 1930s) had the kind of money to offer open-ended funding for a scientific project the cost of which was unknown and unknowable, but clearly massive.[15]In the end, the Manhattan Project cost the US military between US$2 and US$3 billion, in dollars of the day. This offer was not spurred by patriotism but by the prospect of financial gain and control of both the technology and the application of this ‘science’. We can therefore further question who would have taken ownership of the technology, and who would have been the intended victims of this large personal investment. One plausible theory

I would add here that many of Einstein’s propagandists and apologists have made repeated efforts to pass the blame for the development of the atomic bomb onto Enrico Fermi, another monstrous falsehood. The US government offered Fermi a cash payment of US$100,000[16]The average annual income in the US in 1935 was about $1,500, thus this represents about 65 years of average income. to lead the research and development of the atom bomb, but Fermi refused. I have seen a copy of a letter from Fermi to the US President claiming that something so evil had “no right to exist”. In fact, it was Oppenheimer and Szilard who led the development of what was almost in totality a Jewish project, so much so that for many years in scientific circles the atomic bomb was widely known as “The Jewish hell-bomb”.[17]The Secret History Of The Atomic Bomb by Eustace C. Mullins; http://whale.to/b/mullins8.html I believe it was Eustace Mullins who first coined the phrase, and I believe it was he who first suggested there was “circumstantial but compelling evidence” that the Jewish motivation for offering to finance the A-bomb’s development was to take control of the technology and use it for Germany’s total destruction.”[18]http://www.vanguardnewsnetwork.com/2013/08/the-jewi...ar-ii/ The theory is more than plausible if you are familiar with the heavily-evidenced proposition that the underlying purpose of both world wars was the total destruction of Germany). You can understand why items like this are restricted to the blank pages in our history book.

Alexander Graham Bell – The Man Who Didn’t Invent the Telephone

History books tell us the famous American, Alexander Graham Bell, invented the telephone. This claim has only two flaws; Bell was Canadian, not American, and he did not invent the telephone.

An Italian named Antonio Meucci patented a working telephone many years before Bell did anything.[19]Antonio Meucci – Biography, Facts and Pictures; https://www.famousscientists.org/antonio-meucci Bell had obtained copies of Meuci’s drawings and patents and had attempted to obtain US patents on Meuci’s phone. Meucci discovered Bell’s attempted patent of his invention and filed a lawsuit against Bell, in support of which he brought from Italy all his documents, working models, original sketches and his patent, to present to the court as evidence of his prior invention. The delivery company – Western Union – was charged with the responsibility as trustee to hold this evidence for delivery to the court, but all of it “amazingly disappeared without a trace immediately prior to the court hearing, leaving Meucci with no proof of anything and thus losing his lawsuit against Bell.” It is worth noting that at the time Bell was employed at the Western Union lab where Meucci’s evidence was being stored.

The Italians are still angry about this. The Italian Historical Association informed us that their investigation produced evidence of illegal relationships between employees of the patent office and Bell’s company. And later, during a lawsuit between Bell and Western Union, it was revealed Bell had agreed to pay Western Union 20% of all profits from ‘his’ telephone, for 17 years, representing millions of dollars, sufficient temptation for Western Union to justify “losing” Meucci’s invention. US media have fabricated at least dozens of tales excusing Bell, a common one that “due to hardships, Meucci could not renew his patent” and therefore Bell could take it, but in fact the US government filed charges against Bell for fraud because of his telephone patent, but powerful friends had the lawsuit delayed year after year until Meucci died.[20]The United States Government vs. Alexander Graham Bell; www.chezbasilio.org/us_bell.htm American history books and sources like Wikipedia omit these critical facts and twist the remaining information, and thus Americans grow up believing yet one more false myth about their country and their innovative ability.

I would make a note here that when doing historical research we sometimes discover that the landscape has been so badly polluted by countless individuals amending details to conform to opinion or ideology (or patriotism) that it becomes nearly impossible to ferret out the actual facts without an extraordinary amount of work. In this case, some have claimed (without evidence) that Meucci lost his patent because he hadn’t the funds to renew it. Others ignore Meucci’s lawsuit against Bell and claim Bell delivered his phone patent and samples to Western Union for evaluation and who later claimed to have lost all of it. And so on. Here are several articles purporting to tell “the real truth”[21]https://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/jun/17/humani...onnews[22]https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2007/aug/06/b...estern[23]http://wondermark.com/true-stuff-western-union-bell/[24]https://sciencetechworld.com/10-famous-stolen-inventions/

Thomas Edison – The Man Who Didn’t Invent Anything

Every American child is taught in school that the famous American Thomas Edison invented the light bulb, Wikipedia claiming that Edison was “the fourth most prolific inventor in history, holding 1,093 US patents in his name, as well as many patents in the UK, France, and Germany”. Edison is given full credit for inventing the light bulb, electricity transmission, electric power utilities, sound recording and motion pictures. All these claims are completely false.[25]http://newsreeling.com/about-thomas-edisons-lies-an...ntions Not only was Edison not one of the most prolific inventors in history, he never invented anything. Edison himself made the statement: “patents 1047 – inventions 0”, in recognition of his situation.

The inventions for which Edison is credited by the Americans were all achieved by others, and his “1,093 US patents” were all either stolen, bullied, extorted or purchased from those same inventors. As another author pointed out, “a man who kidnaps or adopts 1,000 children can hardly be deemed the world’s most prolific father, and a man who steals 1,000 inventions and patents can hardly be deemed the world’s most prolific inventor”. Thomas Edison was unquestionably one of the world’s most prolific thieves, and widely known as a con-man and common thug who often resorted to threats and extortion, but he was no inventor. Edison was mostly just a thieving opportunist who extorted or stole everything that is listed to his credit, but in US history books Edison is revered in totally fabricated myths as the father of the light bulb and America’s most prolific inventor.

The light bulb had been invented by several people in Europe, one of whom, Heinrich Goebel, unsuccessfully tried selling it to Edison who claimed to see no value in it though he was more than happy to purchase the patent from Goebel’s estate when the man died, cheating his widow out of a substantial sum of money. In any case, another man, Joseph Wilson Swan developed and patented a working incandescent light bulb using a carbon filament 20 years before Edison made any such claim.[26]Joseph Swan – Wikipedia; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Swan[27]Joseph Swan | Biography, Lightbulb, & Facts; https://www.britannica.com/biography/Joseph-Wilson-Swan Edison first tried to steal Swan’s invention and, when that proved legally dangerous, he made Swan a minor partner in the Ediswan United Company, buying both Swan and his patented light bulb and claiming the invention for himself. Swan also invented sound recording and other items which are today credited to Edison.[28]Edison & Swan United Electric Light Company is Established; https://worldhistoryproject.org/1883/edison-swan-uni...lished

Every American is taught from birth that Edison labored for years, trying at least 1,000 different substances (some say 2,000) before he discovered that twisted carbon would function acceptably as the filament in a light bulb. The story is entirely false, a myth fabricated after the fact, a little religious morality play to support faith in the American Dream – that persistence and hard work will lead to unlimited fame and riches in the end. Edison did indeed try – and repeatedly failed – to create a light bulb, and he may well have attempted some of those filament trials. But all that is irrelevant because Swan had already proven the effectiveness of a carbon filament when Edison took ownership of his invention and patent.

Edison is given credit for the device which made x-rays possible, but the actual inventor was German scientist Wilhelm Roentgen who publicly displayed x-rays of his wife’s hand years prior to Edison’s fluoroscope. Similarly, Edison is given credit for inventing electrical transmission in various forms, but Nicola Tesla brought this invention to the US and offered it to Edison who took ownership of the process and patents under a promise of $50,000, then refused to pay Tesla and spent years in attempts to destroy his name and reputation.

The US-based Science website dismisses the entire truth about Edison in one cute sentence: “Even though many of his “inventions” were not unique – and he engaged in some well-publicized court battles with other inventors whose ideas he “borrowed” – Edison’s skill at marketing and using his [political] influence often got him the credit.”[29]Thomas A. Edison and the Founding of Science: science.sciencemag.org/content/105/2719/142 And that means Edison patented items that already existed, created by others, and that had sometimes already been patented. Plus, he had a habit of stealing and patenting any ideas brought to him by other inventors. Hence, the lawsuits. But his marketing ability and some powerful political and judicial contacts kept him out of jail. Nevertheless, the myth has been so thoroughly weaved into American history, it could never be recalled.

The US government even issued a special silver dollar coin to commemorate Edison’s non-achievements. And we have an Edison museum complete with the requisite US flag, providing Americans with the unique opportunity to experience delusion and patriotism simultaneously. But the man did invent one thing the history books seem to have quietly deleted. Edison was a believer in spirits and regularly attended séances where mediums would receive and transmit messages from the dead. To more easily conduct these affairs, Edison invented a telephone that he claimed could talk to people in the spirit world, though he didn’t specify what numbers to dial. In a conversation with B.C. Forbes, the founder of Forbes magazine, Edison claimed, “I have been at work for some time building an apparatus … for personalities which have left this earth to communicate with us”. No idea what the spirits said to him, and no idea why his promoters deleted this important item from the history of the world’s greatest inventor.[30]Thomas Edison, B.C. Forbes And The Mystery Of The Spirit Phone; https://www.forbes.com/…/2019/10/25/thomas-edi...-phone

Coca-Cola

Coca-Cola, originally called Kola Coca, was invented more than 140 years ago in a small town in Spain, the creators of the formula for the world’s best-selling soft drink having been cheated of its ownership and billions of dollars. The process was a well-kept secret at the time and quickly became a world-famous product, winning dozens of international gold medals and other awards. Unfortunately, Bautista Aparici, one of the company’s founders, attended a trade fair in Philadelphia and made the mistake of giving a sample and a brief description of the process to an American he happened to meet, and a short time later US pharmacist John Pemberton changed the name to Coca-Cola and patented the product and process, the US government refusing to recognise the original Spanish patent.[31]Spanish town claims origins of Coca-Cola; https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/08/10...38515/[32]https://www.spiegel.de/thema/coca_cola/[33]https://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/local...1.html

The official story is that this drink was “invented by Dr. John Smith Pemberton on May 8, 1886, at Atlanta, Georgia”, in the USA, and was named Coca-Cola because at that time it contained extracts of Coca leaves and Kola nuts, and that the company’s book-keeper renamed the drink because he thought the two ‘C’s’ would look better in advertising. None of that is true. The drink was indeed made from kola nuts and coca leaves, but the new name was a cheap attempt to differentiate itself after Pemberton stole and patented the original formula. All the stories about Pemberton inventing Coke’s secret formula in his laboratory are fabricated nonsense, with the company’s website cleverly designed to airbrush out the drink’s early history and avoid the truth becoming known. Beverage World magazine produced a special issue to commemorate the one-hundredth (American) anniversary of Coca-Cola, claiming Coke was:

“A totally American product born of a solid idea, nurtured throughout the past century with creative thinking and bold decision-making, and always plenty of good old-fashioned hard work. That is as it should be; it is the American way”.

Not by a long shot. Coca-Cola is just one of hundreds of products the Americans have stolen and patented with the full protection of their courts operating under the peculiarly American definition of ‘rule of law’. It isn’t widely-known, though well-documented, that for decades surrounding the turn of the last century, the US government offered between $20,000 and $50,000 to anyone who could steal a foreign patent or product, that amount representing a lifetime’s earnings for an average person.

To add insult to injury, Coca-Cola moved into Spain in 1953, sued the original Spanish owners, then bullied, extorted and bought the rights for a pittance, permitting the firm to continue producing only a single alcoholic beverage under their name. USA Today reported on this without even a hint of regret or shame about the rule of law or fair play or the evils of IP theft. Their only comment: “The Spanish factory has just four employees left and probably won’t last another generation.” Even more insultingly, ABC News dismisses this story as “The Spanish firm that inspired Coke”, although they do state correctly the claim: “Locals believe that the Spanish town of Aielo de Malferit is where Coca-Cola originated — and that the factory which developed the formula that inspired the world’s best-selling soda has been cheated of its rightful place in history. Not to mention profits.”[34]Fizzing Out: The Spanish Firm that Inspired Coke – ABC News; https://abcnews.go.com/International/fizzing-spanish...918738

The Wright Brothers

For more than 100 years, the Smithsonian Institution in Washington has had on display an aircraft that was piloted by Orville and Wilbur Wright in 1903 in Kitty Hawk, North Carolina in man’s first powered, manned aircraft flight, Americans therefore having created “The Age of Flight”.

But that was never true, and the Smithsonian was in on the fraud from the very beginning. In an agreement with the Wright family to donate the aircraft to the Institution, its officials signed a pledge to perpetuate the story that the Wrights had made the first flight, when all present were fully aware the claim was false. And for more than 100 years the Smithsonian Institution of Historical Mythology, with the full support of the US government and the media, has done everything in its power to dismiss, contradict, and just ignore, extensive documentation of other prior flights in an effort to prevent the dethroning of America in the public mind.[35]https://www.foxnews.com/science/smithsonian-releases...claims[36]https://www.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/5/13050...world/

Several people have thoroughly researched the matter and have written authoritative books on other prior flights but these have been “denounced by leading aeronautic agencies” (like the Smithsonian Institution), with the authors dismissed as “unqualified” and their books “unreliable”. In fact, there were many prior flights, some in Europe, Canada, South America, and others in the US itself, and the Smithsonian was fully aware of this. Recently, the editors of the authoritative Jane’s Aircraft firmly declared that Gustave Whitehead had flown years before the Wright Brothers. Alberto Santos-Dumont had done the same in Paris, as had another group in Alberta, Canada.

Moreover, there exists sufficient evidence the Wrights had access to all that prior knowledge in building their own aircraft, then claimed it as their own. In addition to other design features, the Wright brothers claimed ownership of the curved airfoil – without which no aircraft would ever have gotten off the ground anywhere, but, as one historian noted, “the Wrights stole both the concept and the actual design from an Australian who had recorded it years before, and who had himself deduced the concept from the boomerang of the Australian aboriginals.” The Wright Brothers stole the idea to build their aircraft, then patented it and sued others for using it.

Rumors had been circulating for decades that the Smithsonian had signed what was essentially a contract of fraud with the Wright family, agreeing to perpetuate the myth of the first manned flight, in exchange for having the aircraft on permanent display. But the Directors of the Smithsonian repeatedly denied the existence of such an agreement, stating that would be “tampering with history” and that they “would never agree to such a thing.” But then one day a US Senator collected a few lawyers and descended on the Smithsonian in a kind of political raid. And they did indeed locate the document, which reads in part: “Neither the Smithsonian Institution nor its successors nor any museum or other agency, bureau or facilities administered by the United States of America, shall publish or permit to be displayed a statement … in respect of any aircraft model … of earlier date than the Wright Aeroplane of 1903, claiming … that such aircraft was capable of carrying a man under its own power in controlled flight …”[37]http://historybycontract.org/?tag=smithsonian-wrigh...t-1948

And now you know how the Wright Brothers became famous as the first men to fly. One historian wrote that the Smithsonian had no authority “to engage in political engineering of this sort”, noting that this “compromises history”. But compromising history is an American specialty. And this childrens’ tale will never end. Scientific American wrote a long, biased, and foolish article, claiming the other stories as myths and their myth as the truth.[38]https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/myths-abo...ht-br/ Other eminent publications have done the same. This is how history is spun.

To give you an idea of the enormous influence of the US media and book publishers in maintaining these myths, in 2015 David McCullough ignored the judgment by Janes (and the world outside the US), and wrote a new book for Americans that not only perpetuates the myth but enhances it, with the major US media immediately writing glowing book reviews to help push sales and get the propaganda back into the public mind. The Washington Post modestly tells us how “two [American] boys taught the world to fly.” The publishers, Simon and Schuster, tell us the Wright brothers had “exceptional courage and determination”, and “ceaseless curiosity”.[39]https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/The-Wright-Br...728759

Daniel Okrent, in a review of McCullough’s book in the NYT,[40]https://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/10/books/review/the-...h.html adds that their progress was achieved through “excruciating patience and obsessive attention to detail” and with “an elegant demonstration of the creativity of their thinking”. They were “possessed by genius”. Their discovery of the necessity of a curved airfoil was not copied from Australia, but was the result of “endless calculation, application and recalculation”, every concoction being “a dazzling piece of reasoning” pursued with a “grandness of vision”, with the end result being “the most astonishing feat mankind has ever accomplished”. Yes. Except that it wasn’t.

Notes

[1] Jim Quinn: A Nation Built On Lies; https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-07-10/jim-quinn-nation-built-lies-part-2

[2] Einstein’s Plagiarism of the General Theory of Relativity 1st Edition; by Christopher Jon Bjerknes; https://www.amazon.com/Einsteins-Plagiarism-General-Theory-Relativity/dp/1544900872

[3] Einstein A Plagiarist Special Relativity; https://educheer.com/term-paper/einstein-a-plagiarist-special-relativity

[4] Time magazine, July 2006; http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1211594,00.htm

[5] The Guardian, November 11, 1999; “Einstein’s E=mc² was Italian’s idea”; Clark, R. W. [1984], Einstein: The Life and Times, Avon Books, New York. De Pretto, O. [1904], ‘Ipo tesi dell ” et ere nell a vita dell ” universe’, Reale Istituto Veneto di Scienze, Lettere ed Arti, Feb.

[6] http://www.cartesio-episteme.net/episteme/epi6/ep6-bjerk-rec.htm

[7] https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/esp_einstein.htm

[8] https://www.veteranstoday.com/2020/01/02/was-einstein-a-wife-beater-womanizer-plagiarizer-and-eugenicist/

[9] A history of the theories of aether and electricity: https://archive.org/details/historyoftheorie00whitrich

[10] Findings Back Einstein In a Plagiarism Dispute; https://www.nytimes.com/1997/11/18/science/findings-back-einstein-in-a-plagiarism-dispute.html

[11] Photo included:

[12] https://www.nationalgeographic.com/news/2017/04/science-march-einstein-fbi-genius-science/

[13] https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2002/09/eins-s03.html

[14] Photo included:

[15] In the end, the Manhattan Project cost the US military between US$2 and US$3 billion, in dollars of the day.

[16] The average annual income in the US in 1935 was about $1,500, thus this represents about 65 years of average income.

[17] The Secret History Of The Atomic Bomb by Eustace C. Mullins; http://whale.to/b/mullins8.html

[18] http://www.vanguardnewsnetwork.com/2013/08/the-jewish-bomb-that-ended-world-war-ii/

[19] Antonio Meucci – Biography, Facts and Pictures; https://www.famousscientists.org/antonio-meucci

[20] The United States Government vs. Alexander Graham Bell; www.chezbasilio.org/us_bell.htm

[21] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/jun/17/humanities.internationaleducationnews

[22] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2007/aug/06/bellvwestern

[23] http://wondermark.com/true-stuff-western-union-bell/

[24] https://sciencetechworld.com/10-famous-stolen-inventions/

[25] http://newsreeling.com/about-thomas-edisons-lies-and-19-stolen-inventions

[26] Joseph Swan – Wikipedia; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Swan

[27] Joseph Swan | Biography, Lightbulb, & Facts; https://www.britannica.com/biography/Joseph-Wilson-Swan

[28] Edison & Swan United Electric Light Company is Established; https://worldhistoryproject.org/1883/edison-swan-united-electric-light-company-is-established

[29] Thomas A. Edison and the Founding of Science: science.sciencemag.org/content/105/2719/142

[30] Thomas Edison, B.C. Forbes And The Mystery Of The Spirit Phone; https://www.forbes.com/…/2019/10/25/thomas-edison-bc-forbes-mystery-spirit-phone

[31] Spanish town claims origins of Coca-Cola; https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/08/10/newser-spanish-town-coca-cola/2638515/

[32] https://www.spiegel.de/thema/coca_cola/

[33] https://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/locals-say-coca-cola-originated-in-aielo-de-malferit-in-spain-a-915371.html

[34] Fizzing Out: The Spanish Firm that Inspired Coke – ABC News; https://abcnews.go.com/International/fizzing-spanish-firm-inspired-coke/story?id=19918738

[35] https://www.foxnews.com/science/smithsonian-releases-wright-brothers-contract-detailing-first-in-flight-claims

[36] https://www.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/5/130503-wright-brothers-first-flight-gustave-whitehead-aviation-smithsonian-institution-adventure-world/

[37] http://historybycontract.org/?tag=smithsonian-wright-agreement-1948

[38] https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/myths-about-the-wright-br/

[39] https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/The-Wright-Brothers/David-McCullough/9781476728759

[40] https://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/10/books/review/the-wright-brothers-by-david-mccullough.html

 
• Category: History, Science • Tags: Albert Einstein, Conspiracy Theories 
Hide 649 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. There are only two nations in the world whose existence seems to be founded primarily on historical myths.

    https://media.mythopedia.com/assets/images/japanese-mythology/gods/amaterasu/amaterasu-japanese-goddess-of-the-sun.jpg?q=75&w=640&ar=3:2&fit=crop&auto=format%20320w

    “Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.”

  2. dearieme says:

    I’m going to have to read this again. I knew there were other telephone inventors. I had assumed that the Wright Brothers got the credit they deserved. I knew that the Edison light bulb tale (and the Edison vs Tesla tale) were bunk – as anyone can see by looking at Wikipedia.

    As for Einstein, I knew that Special Relativity could as well be attributed to Fitzgerald, Poincare, and Lorentz. What comes as a surprise to me is your claim that General Relativity also wasn’t his. Goodness me.

    Now then, what about Ben Franklin and the kite-and-lightning experiment: also bunkum?

  3. There are only two nations in the world whose existence seems to be founded primarily on historical myths.

    Why are you so shy? Just tell us which nation is the second one, and why it is Russia 😉

  4. Svevlad says:

    But… Who’s the other one?

  5. willem1 says:

    I recollect that the Wright’s first patent was actually for their “wing warping” method of controlling flight, and not the airfoil. The later invention of ailerons (Curtis?) was an attempt to get around this patent.

  6. @another anon

    CORRECTION : The second nation whose existence is founded on historical myth is Israel not Russia.

  7. This article is pretty much spot-on regarding propaganda-as-history. A few morsels spring to mind:

    Concentration camps, in the modern era, aren’t the brainchild of Germany or Japan. The British Empire, as savage as any other, invented concentration camps to deal with the Boers in Southern Africa.

    The Soviet Union abandoned attempts at putting men into space after a Cosmonaut returned from a deep-space excursion in a highly irradiated deep-fried condition. Yet the USA managed to put a whole menagerie of giant-leaping heroes in tin cans onto the Moon with nary a suntan.

    Did Colonel Gaddafi really issue viagra to his soldiers to help them rape everything that moved? Did Saddam Hussein’s soldiers really go on a rampage throwing Kuwaiti infants out of incubators and leaving them on the floor to die? Did Bashar al Assad really drop chlorine munitions on his own people at exactly the time when his forces were winning the tide of battle?

    As Mr. Romanoff says, 50% of history is obscured from our view, and most of the rest is fiction.

    • Agree: Tor597
  8. Pheasant says:
    @dearieme

    Does Romanoff exaggerate?

    Sincere question. I thought that it was well established that Einstien was boosted beyond merit by (mainly) Jews but that his first award was well deserved if not his massive publicity.

    The stuff about Edison I did not know- I knew he bought and marketed patented ideas but I thought he was a bonified inventer in his own right?

    Seems like the only person who gets out of this with a clean record was Tesla.

    The story about Spanish Coca-Cola is simply incredible and I cannot believe I have never heard it before.

    One of the best articles on Unz in a while.

    Thank you very much.

  9. IvyMike says:

    These examples of history are not much more than pop culture myths, hopefully when the Author publishes all forthcoming books there will be some actual meat on the bones.

    • Replies: @padre
  10. 7.Ultrafart the Brave says:

    “Did Colonel Gaddafi really issue viagra to his soldiers to help them rape everything that moved? Did Saddam Hussein’s soldiers really go on a rampage throwing Kuwaiti infants out of incubators and leaving them on the floor to die?”

    Your questions are appropriate. You could also have asked if the Germans really had tubs full of human eyeballs and really collected Jews’s bodies for glycerine to make soap, whether they really dropped poisoned candy from airplanes.

    On the other hand, you can expect an opposite answer if you ask whether the British troops during the Boer Wars really did tie a Boer by the ankles to the back of a Land-Rover type vehicle and drive him around the countryside until his body disintegrated.

    The collected facts seem to indicate that the atrocities committed by the bad guys were usually fictitious while those committed by “our side” were mostly accurate. There are exceptions, of course.

    This is a quote from an article by Fred Reed:

    http://www.fredoneverything.net/EternalWar.shtml

    “A tank that is mortally hit belches forth long searing tongues of orange flame from every hatch. As ammunition explodes in the interior, the hull is racked by violent convulsions and sparks erupt from the spout of the barrel like the fireballs of a Roman candle. Silver rivulets of molten aluminum pour from the engine like tears…When the inferno subsides, gallons of lubricating oil in the power train and hundreds of pounds of rubber in the tracks and bogey wheels continue to burn, spewing dense clouds of black smoke over the funeral pyre.”

    But Libyan soldiers escaping these burnt-out tanks (seen in the background photos) were brandishing store-fresh packs of Viagra. And who said when there’s a fire you should forget about your valuables and just head for the exit.

    One of the lies which sealed Iraq’s fate was from the tearful “hospital volunteer” Nayirah who testified to Congress that Iraqi soldiers were tossing babies out of incubators onto the cold floor to die, and then taking the incubators (no idea why soldiers would want infant incubators). That was a PR stunt dreamt up by the global PR company Hill and Knowlton Strategies, Inc., and ‘Nayirah’ was later identified as the young daughter of the Kuwaiti Ambassador to Washington. But everyone thought the story was so cute there were no repercussions.

  11. Others flew before the Wright Brothers, but none of them understood or had mastered control of aircraft in all three axes of flight: pitch, roll, and yaw. The Wrights were the ones who conceived and developed flight controls for all three axes, the lack of which rendered impracticable and doomed all of their predecessors’ machines. The Wrights mastery of control in all three axes is what made them the inventors of the practical, useful, controllable airplane, and to this day every aircraft since the Wrights’ Flyer has incorporated control systems over all three axes of flight.

    A criticism of the Wrights centered solely on the airfoil conveniently overlooks the brilliance of their invention of control over all three axes of flight.

    Further, the Wrights meticulous refinement of their propeller shape was also brilliant. To this day the most efficient propellers are a mere 3% more efficient than the Wrights’ propeller.

  12. 5.willem1 says:

    “I recollect that the Wright’s first patent was actually for their “wing warping” method of controlling flight, and not the airfoil. The later invention of ailerons (Curtis?) was an attempt to get around this patent.”

    Your recollection is accurate in part. The wings of the earliest aircraft were simply paper or cloth glued to a flat stick frame (like an umbrella construction). The wing warping was an attempt to duplicate the aerodynamic features of a solid curved airfoil which could not yet be built.

    .

    8.Pheasant says:

    “Does Romanoff exaggerate? Sincere question.”

    I concur. In doing historical research we often encounter circumstances where we are certain the author is either a twisted ideologue or is simply crazy, or is at best either lying or wildly exaggerating. Countless times I would be saying to myself, “Okay, this is crazy. This cannot possibly be true. They would never do that.” But with continued digging I would discover that it wasn’t crazy and that yes they really would do that. Many of these revelations are psychically draining. There were times when I would abandon my computer and either go for a long walk or down multiple scotches until the emotional shock subsided. The history of MK-ULTRA, Eisenhower’s Death Camps in Germany, the 500,000 German POWs in the US who simply disappeared, the overwhelming insidious and criminal influence of Rothschild’s Tavistock Institute, and so many more, shock you to your depths.

    .

    9.IvyMike says:

    “These examples of history are not much more than pop culture myths, hopefully when the Author publishes all forthcoming books there will be some actual meat on the bones.”

    I agree the contents of this essay are minor in comparison to the above, but they serve as yet more proof that most history is a Disney made-for-TV special. If you really want history with some ‘meat on its bones’, here are a few articles on on this website to prove to you that “yes, they really would do that”:

    https://www.unz.com/lromanoff/tiananmen-square-the-failure-of-an-american-instigated-1989-color-revolution/
    https://www.unz.com/lromanoff/the-greatest-intellectual-property-theft-in-history-operation-paperclip/
    https://www.unz.com/lromanoff/japan-ending-a-war-and-saving-lives/
    https://www.unz.com/lromanoff/robert-mcnamaras-infamous-project-100000-and-the-vietnam-war-a-premeditated-crime-against-humanity/
    https://www.unz.com/lromanoff/prisoner-of-war-camps-in-america/

    If you want something more entertaining and not so stressful, read the story of Jessica Lynch. It’s cute, Nayirah-style.

    https://www.unz.com/lromanoff/fake-news-and-the-naked-government-jessica-lynch-and-the-us-invasion-of-iraq/

    • Thanks: Iris
    • Replies: @Wade
  13. Beware of the Chinese. The Communists. As you would expect, Communists have no respect for intellectual property rights and are notorious for endlessly stealing American intellectual property.

    Can you imagine that? Notorious!

    Um… isn’t that a balanced viewpoint? After all, what other country would do such a thing? What other nation is such a bunch of robbers?

    Beware of the evil Chinese!

    • Agree: Ultrafart the Brave
    • Replies: @Esther Bunny Brown
  14. sergei32 says:

    Damned accursed Americans. Hustlers, hucksters, thieves, and knaves. Can’t wait for the whole shameful country, its filthy and utterly ugly, destructive, culture, and its essentially knavish greedy predatory population to vanish.

  15. 11.Auntie Analogue says:

    “Others flew before the Wright Brothers, but none of them understood or had mastered control of aircraft in all three axes of flight . . . The Wrights were the ones who conceived and developed flight controls for all three axes . . . Further, the Wrights meticulous refinement of their propeller shape was also brilliant. To this day the most efficient propellers are a mere 3% more efficient than the Wrights’ propeller.”

    I regret to have to flatly contradict your statements, but there is no existing evidence to support these claims, especially your 3-axis flight control. Further, even the US-based Hartzell propeller company exaggerates the Wright propellers at only 65% to 70% efficiency, and stating “Today’s propellers are around 90 percent efficient.” Moreover, Hartzell admits their numbers are (patriotic) ‘estimates’ while other similar and non-American firms estimate 40% to 50% efficiency.

    The range variations aren’t important. What is important is your latter claim that the most efficient propellers today “are a mere 3% more efficient than the Wrights’ propeller.”

    It is precisely such claims that serve to rubbish our history and irrevocably damage our ability to understand our world as it really is. As I have written many times before, I believe that deliberately false historical claims should be a criminal offense.

  16. Biff says:

    “the Wrights stole both the concept and the actual design from an Australian who had recorded it years before, and who had himself deduced the concept from the boomerang of the Australian aboriginals.”

    The “nigger haters” are gonna love that one!

    • Replies: @Humphrey
  17. Barr says:

    These two issues might have relevance to mythology behind establishment of the colony and creation of USA

    1 Pilgrims left on Mayfair not because they were persecuted . They left because they couldn’t impose their religious views on the rest of the Britain.

    2 Boston Tea protest was not based on the taxation issue . It was the restrictions Crown imposed on the seizure of Indian land . Manchester ( UK ) didn’t have any representation despite being taxed in 1770.

    • Replies: @Anon
    , @The Alarmist
    , @Anonymous
  18. Realist says:

    This essay is a brief introduction to only a minor aspect of this subject.

    At 5,400 words it is not brief.

    • Replies: @Astuteobservor II
  19. Realist says:
    @Pheasant

    The stuff about Edison I did not know- I knew he bought and marketed patented ideas but I thought he was a bonified inventer in his own right?

    Edison was a tinkerer…he knew nothing of science. He just screwed around with things to see what would happen…with no regard to material science. He stole ideas and hired some people with the abilities he lacked. He was also a immoral asshole that would do anything to make a buck….including needlessly electrocuting an elephant.

    • Thanks: Pheasant
    • Replies: @profnasty
    , @grimfandango
  20. Realist says:

    None of the things Einstein was famous for were accomplished in the US. Einstein was brought to the US to gain some of the prestige he had attained…and to embarrass Germany.

    • Replies: @mark green
    , @annamaria
  21. Anon[544] • Disclaimer says:
    @Barr

    Except the pilgrims weren’t the first settlers.

    https://www.historytoday.com/history-matters/mayflower

    The pilgrims were not the first British settlers in North America. The officially sanctioned colony of Jamestown, Virginia, was 13 years old in 1620 and Roanoake colony, founded in the 1580s, had disappeared.

    • Replies: @dearieme
    , @Polymath
  22. Barr says:

    So what did we invent other than amorality in life ,money as ultimate measure of success ,happiness, and measure of being correct, lip servicing to Jesus every Sunday ,and may be MRI ,lots of medicine,few military stuffs, and internet ?

  23. Hrw-500 says:

    For the invention of the telephone, I also heard of Elisha Gray where some said he invented it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elisha_Gray

  24. Chris Moore says: • Website

    Einstein was Jewish and had the support of the Jewish-controlled media who conspired to create yet another historical myth. His fame and popularity today, his status as a hero of the scientific world, are due only to decades of a well-planned force-feeding of the Einstein myth to the masses by the media. The propaganda machine simply airbrushed out of the history books all the physicists who formulated these theories, and credited everything to Einstein. Without the extravagant generations-long PR and propaganda campaign, Einstein would have remained in the dustbin of obscurity where he belongs.

    That goes for the entirety of Jewish accomplishment. They’re all working towards Zionism — the principle that the Jews are God’s “Chosen People” and all human accomplishments can be traced back to them.

    Of course, it’s all a lie, a myth and a fraud, perpetrated not out of some religious fantasy or idealism, but to advance their individual and organized crime gang bottom line. Even the fact that they’re Jews is a myth, a fraud and lie. At best, they’re Hebrew-Khazarian hybrids, and even that’s a stretch. What they really are is highly coordinated “nation” of identity thieves, method actors, grifters and geopolitical terrorists.

    The myth of the “Holocaust” is another fantasy and media creation, done to advance the “Persecuted” half of their Chosen/Persecuted shtick.

    But the greedy rubes of white (and later brown and black) America played along with their shtick for their own financial gain and geopolitical purposes, and now all of America is reaping the whirlwind, when in fact the treasonous Zionists and their neocon and fake-liberal (“Deep State”) allies should be paying the price.

    • Agree: Druid55, Sulu
  25. I have heard that the elevation of Einstein’s contributions over those of other physicists was US government propaganda, to hold up this colorful and eccentric character as a means of popularizing science. I don’t fault the man for going along with it.
    Edison was not so much an inventor as an entrepreneur. I’m not aware that he ever claimed to have done it all by himself. He was able to marshal the talent of many individuals to significantly advance our society.

    • Replies: @Hibernian
  26. You should add Steve Jobs to the list. The guy plastered his name on every patent application filed by Apple. That’s unlawful under U.S. patent law, which stipulates that only the actual inventors can be listed on the application. And he didn’t “invent” the GUI, the mouse, or the laser printer – he saw them at Xerox PARC. Bill Gates called him out on this in the late 1980s or early 1990s.

    He was a narcissist who couldn’t stand seeing others develop something without an acknowledgment that it was “his genius” that led to the development. Everyone knows that Woz was the real force behind the Apple ][.

  27. Excellent and informative article, Mr. Romanoff, although it’s disheartening to realize much of history is suspect. I never knew that about the Wright Brothers or Coca Cola. The worst part is the propaganda has been so intense that 99.9% of people will think you’re a nut for stating these claims publicly.

    • Replies: @teo toon
    , @Patagonia Man
  28. teo toon says:

    @Romanoff
    The question becomes: Why did/do those who rule over us put forward these lies from the beginning; what have they accomplished that could not have been accomplished by telling the truth? And who are these people: we read about the Freemasons founding the government, about a new constitution created in 1871 and at the same time becoming a corporation; thereby governing us under the Law of the Sea (Admiralty) as opposed to the original which was the Law of the Land.

    Is there not only a Hegelian political left/right game being played but also an information true/false game: both poles have some positions that are true and some that are untrue; the game appears to allow one pole (a fake thesis as is the antithesis) to dominate along with its falsehoods; then, the second pole, having knowledge of what is true, critiques the first and is found to be telling truth, while hiding its falsehoods; as a result, the population seeing that it has been lied to moves to support the second pole; thereby creating the synthesis. And the game begins again to move the populace to the real position the master class desires.

    Are there additional poles set up orthogonal to the original poles to which turn those who have perceived the lies of each pole: the history of Tartaria, the mud floods, the orphan trains, mud floods, etc? Thanks to this Hegelian mind game the people find themselves trapped in an miasma of uncertainty: knowledge has become shadows and fog: what is in truth solid ground is thought to be just one more bog.

    • Replies: @Wade
  29. 28.teo toon says:

    “Is there not only a Hegelian political left/right game being played but also an information true/false game: And who are these people: we read about the Freemasons founding the government, about . . .”

    You have much of it correct. It is a long story, and it requires an understanding of Lippman and Bernays, Wellington House and the Tavistock Institute, to connect all the dots and grasp the entire picture. The blunt truth is that the American people have been subjected to more than 100 years of non-stop “engineering of consent”, brainwashing in fact. More than a century of genuine and atrocious psychological abuse, all designed by our European banking friends, aided by their nearly total control of all media in long-term preparation for our Brave New World.

    The fundamental tenet is that most people in a society – Americans certainly included – if left to their own devices, behave normally. They are rational, can be imaginative and creative, generally get along with each other, and build a human and well-functioning society. But if these people are subjected to continuous stress of a particular kind, usually involving fear (of enemies, of Communism, of terrorists, of anything), they eventually collapse inwardly from the psychic pressure and revert to a more animal-like functioning based on primitive emotion and instinct. Society itself breaks down and the people, confused and afraid, have no choice but to turn to the state for protection. And that makes them eminently controllable. Sheep and cattle, but controllable sheep and cattle.

    And part of that control process involves constant feeding through the media of fear on the one hand and nourishment on the other, the nourishment consisting of “See how great it is to be an American”, i.e. Einstein, Coca-Cola, Thomas Edison, the Wright Brothers, (increasingly non-existent) democracy and freedom. And so on.

    In this condition and according to this process developed by Rothschild, Freud, Bernays, Lippman, Lord Northcliffe at the Tavistock Institute of social programming and mass brainwashing, the media participate by substituting opinion for news and eliminating detail so as to eliminate understanding of current events. The result is that under this multi-pronged oppression people lose their ability to think. And when George Bush tells 1,000 obvious lies about why an innocent country like Iraq should be destroyed, the people cannot see and they acquiesce. They know the lies are lies but can no longer think rationally enough to put the pieces together.

    The end game is the destruction of societies and sovereign states, the elimination of much of the world’s population, and a world government run by a few hundred people who will own all of the means of production, supported by small numbers of educated compradors. We are closer than you might think. World War Three is required to finish the preparation, hence the 24-7 hate campaigns against China, Russia, Iran, Venezuela, filling the Western populations with sufficient hatred so as to quietly acquiesce as cannon fodder one more time to eliminate the last pockets of resistance to the world our new masters are preparing for us. It’s not pretty.

    If all the American media could be shut down totally for six months, Americans would begin to regain their sanity, all the politicians and corporate executives would be hung from trees, and the nation would stop collapsing. But it’s too late now. That will never happen.

  30. Nick110 says:

    I’m not sure about the others, but I spent quite a bit of time on the Wright Brothers here in Dayton, OH.

    The only two contenders during this period were Otto Lilienthal and Samuel Langley. Both failed.

    All of the other claims were obscure and unverified. The Wright Brothers flew over an extended period at Huffman Prairie, where hundreds witnessed the Flyer taking off, making circles around the field, and surviving the landing. Later they repeated the demonstration in France and Fort Meade.

    None of the other claimants have any kind of comparable record. It’s usually “somebody said somebody said he flew.”

    One side note: Lilienthal did the original work on wing lift and drag. His numbers were wrong. The Wrights realized this and hid their wind tunnel work — the famous Wright “penchant for secrecy.” They had the only correct information, and this advantage put them in front.

    In short, after the Wright Brothers flew, everybody flew. Before the Wright Brothers, there was only talk of flying.

  31. MFV says:

    I regret to have to flatly contradict your statements, but there is no existing evidence to support these claims, especially your 3-axis flight control.

    What of the evidence in the 1902 glider of a 3-axis flight control system? Did you find this in another invention that preceded Kitty Hawk?

  32. Jmaie says:

    Far from being a competent physicist, he once even flatly denied that the atom could be split and, much later, admitted that the idea of a chain reaction in fissile material “had never occurred to me”.[2][3]

    Regarding your footnote three – I offer no opinion on the work’s validity, but it seems odd that a student term paper (author unnamed) would be considered good source material. Having to vet third level information is a bit unwieldy, I’d prefer direct references in your main article. But that’s just me.

    If all the American media could be shut down totally for six months, Americans would begin to regain their sanity…

    In this I wholly concur.

  33. The theory is more than plausible if you are familiar with the heavily-evidenced proposition that the underlying purpose of both world wars was the total destruction of Germany).

    Can you share any material from this evidence?

    Thanks!

    • Replies: @Curmudgeon
    , @ploni almoni
  34. The devil is in the retail?

    It’s important we know the real facts of history, and I’m sure many myths about past heroes are just that, myths as meaning phony.

    But one can take this too far. For example, many have said Bob Dylan is a phony because he took so many ideas and bits & pieces from other artists and tradition. But Dylan’s genius was rearranging and rethinking them that made his work unique and special. He made it his own, and even subtle alterations and revisions can make all the difference. It’s like mustard is not just a bit of condiment on the hotdog. It completes the hotdog, makes it what it is.

    Now, there are outright plagiarisms, and Led Zeppelin has been accused of those. It is true that they did steal a few songs outright and took credit. But other charges of plagiarism are rather specious. For example, there is a similar vibe between the opening of “Stairway to Heaven” and some song by the band Spirit, but Stairway is clearly Zeppelin’s.

    Now, if some Spaniard did make the first coke or proto-coke, credit should be given to him. But similar isn’t enough. Surely, the American Coke did something with the product to make it distinct.
    It’s like the hamburger is German in origin because some Germans in Hamburg came up with a way of making minced-meat steak. That is the main ingredient of the hamburger, but the real hamburger is chopped beef between two buns with catsup and pickles. Even seemingly slight alterations or additions create a new product. It’s like both CO and CO2 are made of carbon and oxyen but work totally differently.

    Now, I’ve no idea how true or false the charges against Einstein are. My math knowledge doesn’t extend far beyond 2 + 2 = 4, but me thinks he had a certain knack and genius for synthesizing the various theories in physics into a larger theory. He made his own brand of pizza from existing ingredients. Same might be said of Darwin and Marx as the theory of evolution and the theory of socialism pre-existed their entry into the fields. But they added their own ideas that led to grand theories.

    You can take any movie, even CITIZEN KANE, and nitpick that some other film-maker did something like it before here and there, but the WAY Welles and his collaborators did it in KANE was especially striking.

    And even though this may not be fair, historical significance is about consequence. A lot of innovative stuff were without consequence upon their invention. Then, someone later came upon the same idea on his own or reworked the neglected idea, and it led to consequences and won the accolades.

    It is about how one puts them all together. The song “Yesterday” sounds similar to many earlier ballads, but it is still distinct and original as expression. McCartney gave it his own twist.
    Many Westerns are very similar, but Anthony Mann made the genre his own despite using the formula that were pretty identical with other Westerns.

    One might say Bloody Mary isn’t an original drink because the creator of the drink(some say Hemingway done it) didn’t invent tomato juice, vodka, celery, hot sauce, and etc. But he put them together in a new way.

    So, even as the unsung heroes of invention should be given credit due them, most inventors or innovators didn’t so much make totally new stuff but took existing material and put them together in new fresh ways. Take the iPhone. Steve Jobs wasn’t the engineer and most of the technologies in the phone existed. But Jobs steered the project to see it through. He did for smart phones what Edison did for various inventions. Edison was more businessman than ‘scientist’, but he supervised the various projects that led to genuine breakthroughs. He may have been a charlatan in many ways, but then, so was Steve Jobs. But he did something.

    • Agree: Joseph Doaks
    • Replies: @Barr
    , @Rev. Spooner
    , @Rdm
  35. @Chris Moore

    The myth of the “Holocaust” is another fantasy and media creation

    First I’ve heard of that. That is going to be absolutely huge once the public hears about this. I mean there are dozens of famous movies about it and there are museums dedicated to it all over the place. Talk about an absolute bombshell.

    • Replies: @GeeBee
    , @Wtf
  36. The story of the Wright Brothers I saw at the Smithsonian Air & Space Museum, was that many people had built and were building powered aircraft, but that none of them were successful over distance, because they were all relying on the same inaccurate mathematical modeling out of France. Where they say the Wright Bros succeeded, was that they recognized that the math did not match reality, leading them to build their own wind tunnel, which led to the first working, practical design. Take it for what it is worth, but it is more nuanced than the simple version presented above.

    • Replies: @syonredux
  37. syonredux says:
    @Pheasant

    Does Romanoff exaggerate?

    That’s putting it mildly……

    For the Wright Bros, I’d recommend this article:

    https://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2780/the-wright-stuff/

    The short answer is yes, the Wright Bros were the first to develop a practical heavier-than-air flying machine.

    For Edison, it’s useful to remember that he made his initial pile with the quadruplex telegraph and won world-wide fame with the phonograph. And those were done mostly on his own. Later work is more complicated. For example, the kinetoscope was largely the work of one of Edison’s employees, William Kennedy Dickson.

    RE: the “Genius: one percent inspiration and 99 percent perspiration,” quote,

    That’s also one of the things that works against Edison in terms of popular culture. We have this romantic image of the scientist/inventor as a kind of lonely visionary. Edison, in contrast, was about relentless work. There’s a problem to be solved? Gather a team of smart guys and start finding solutions. In order to solve this problem we need someone with a thorough grounding in mathematics? Hire that Francis Robbins Upton kid that Hermann von Helmholtz thinks so highly of.

    A fair number of historians of science would argue that Edison’s prototype industrial lab in Menlo Park was his greatest contribution.

    • Thanks: Pheasant
  38. syonredux says:
    @Fozzy Bear

    I think that it’s quite clear that Mr Romanoff doesn’t really get nuance…..

  39. syonredux says:
    @Larry Romanoff

    the nourishment consisting of “See how great it is to be an American”, i.e. Einstein, Coca-Cola,

    Einstein wasn’t an American in anything but a legal sense; he was in his 50s when he moved to the USA and the work that he is famous for was done in Europe. The greatest American physicist is the sadly obscure Josiah Willard Gibbs:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josiah_Willard_Gibbs

    Who cares about Coca-Cola?

    “See how great it is to be an American”

    Are you not watching the MSM right now? According to the Woke, Amerikkka is a White supremacist hellhole….You need to get with the times, granddad. America was built by Black people.Edison and the Wrights were evil White cis-men.Read the 1619 Project and get your eyes opened….

    • LOL: mark green
    • Replies: @GazaPlanet
    , @Sya Beerens
  40. DustyBear says:

    Great information. Appreciated.

    Do you have a reference to the “Australian who had recorded it years before”?

    I think that would be very interesting to follow up.

    DustyBear

    • Replies: @Kapyong
  41. My compliments to author as this is your best expose by far, I look forward to buying and reading your book.

  42. Boldizar says:
    @dearieme

    Franklin was standing right next to Washington’s freshly cut cherry tree when it happened.

    • Replies: @Moi
    , @Hibernian
    , @mc86
  43. Boldizar says:

    A comment above this mentions a detail I missed in the opening, Larry Romanoff (as listed) will soon be publishing books. Interested after reading this article I saw that he quoted an article of his own in the second introductory paragraph. However, this Zerohedge article is authored by one “Jim Quinn”. A pen name perhaps, moving along…

    I think that maybe I can find a website social media account through which I can find more information on these book releases. The name “Larry Romanoff” gets a hit from a Wall Street Journal article. It discusses how Romanoff has written articles in the past generally showing favor to China and that, in a new writing, he is attributing the Coronavirus outbreak to the United States (something I believe utterly against fact and logic, but that hasn’t stopped Unz from diving in head first; see the most recent, shameful American Pravda).

    I found this article very compelling at first glance. However, tt strikes me that an article set about tearing away the past valor of the American Society is being written by the same person associated with writing articles favoring the Chinese, even saying that the Wuhan Flu originated in the States. It is too convenient. The world is full of bullshit, past, present, and future, and I cannot help but smell it here. The article’s internal thesis asks us to question everything we know as truth. Within 15 minuets of shallow research I already have a strong suspicion that it and its writer are guilty of the same crimes with which it charges others (maybe correctly so).

  44. 35.Gabriel Oliveira says:

    The theory is more than plausible if you are familiar with the heavily-evidenced proposition that the underlying purpose of both world wars was the total destruction of Germany.

    “Can you share any material from this evidence?”

    You have asked a good question but there is no way to respond with only a few words or refererences because there are too many dots to be connected. One portion is direct quotes from Churchill, “Germany will have this war whether she wants it or not.” “This is England’s war, and the purpose is the destruction of Germany.” There are many similar statements from various sources effectively documenting the thesis that Germany was “to be destroyed once and for all”.

    Consider the Morgenthau Plan, which was to totally pastoralise Germany, completely de-industrialise the country and turn Germany forever into Europe’s dairy farm and potato patch. And yes, the plan was well into implementation before it was stopped.

    Consider the apparently little-known fact that early in the war England was on the ropes, badly beaten and without hope, at which point Hitler offered a lasting peace – to cease all hostilities, return to the situation existing prior to the war, pay no reparations, and simply stop a useless war. But the London Jews wanted Palestine (and also the destruction of Germany) and told Churchill to refuse the peace offer, promising to bring the US into the war against Germany and thus achieve their private objectives. That needlessly extended the war by several years, untold destruction, and countless millions of deaths.

    This may make some readers go up in smoke, but it is not realistic to challenge the assertion that both world wars were hatched not in Germany but in England, by the Jewish banking dynasties in cooperation with the British Royal Family. There is simply too much supporting evidence. The worldwide “anger campaigns” against Germany hatched at the Rothschild’s Tavistock Institute are almost sufficient in themselves to fully justify the assertion. If you don’t know, their purpose was to create a worldwide climate of not only hatred but of ‘action-inducing anger’ against everything German, sufficient to (hopefully) cause the entire world to want to crush Germany out of existence. Moreover, there was actually a plan proposed to exterminate all Germans after the war and have the state of Germany disappear from existence.

    .

    38.Just another serf says:

    “The myth of the “Holocaust” is another fantasy and media creation.”

    “First I’ve heard of that. That is going to be absolutely huge once the public hears about this. I mean there are dozens of famous movies about it and there are museums dedicated to it all over the place. Talk about an absolute bombshell.”

    The Power Behind the Throne is a dangerous subject in today’s political climate, most especially that relating to the claimed “holocaust”. I haven’t had occasion to research this myself, but I am told by people who should know that if you search for original military aerial photos of the Auschwitz area prior to, during, and after the Second World War, the famous “gas chamber” museum existing at Auschwitz today doesn’t appear in the photos until about 1948. Talk about setting the cat among the pigeons.

    • Replies: @S
    , @GeeBee
    , @psbindy
  45. syonredux says:

    History books tell us the famous American, Alexander Graham Bell, invented the telephone. This claim has only two flaws; Bell was Canadian, not American, and he did not invent the telephone.

    Or maybe it has three flaws, seeing as how Bell was born and raised in Scotland. He was ranked 57th in the BBC 2002 100 Greatest Britons poll…..

    Recently, the editors of the authoritative Jane’s Aircraft firmly declared that Gustave Whitehead had flown years before the Wright Brothers.

    Let’s just say that the evidence for Whitehead’s flight is a tad thin.Here’s an article discussing Whitehead and his alleged flight:

    https://www.aerosociety.com/media/4951/the-flight-claims-of-gustave-whitehead.pdf

    Alberto Santos-Dumont had done the same in Paris,

    Do you mean his 1906 flight? Because that would have been after flights made by the Wrights in 1903, 1904, and 1905. The 1905 flight was with the Wright Flyer III. On one of the 1905 flights they flew 24 miles in a circular flight (i.e., it was a controlled flight) for 39 minutes.Santos-Dumont, in contrast, only flew 220 meters in 1906.And his time aloft was 21.5 seconds….

    as had another group in Alberta, Canada.

    Would you mind naming them?

  46. Assuming that the “other country” is the zionazi pseudostate, there are two quibbles: first, it’s not a country, but an illegal colonial project, and, secondly, that it isn’t separate from the Imperalist States of Amerikastan, but is its actual capital and ruling territory.

  47. anonimo11 says:

    There is a lot to unpack here, and regrettably I have varied degrees of familiarity with all the topics presented here (except coca Cola). I say regrettably because i am very busy these days.

    Anyhow, to discuss just Einstein: on the topic of special relativity Larry is on strong ground. Poincare’s invariants are half the story, the other half are Lorentz transformations. Once you have these two the steps to work out all the mechanical quantities in any frame ( time-space, velocity, energy-momentum, and power-force) are fairly easy and within the reach of a bright undergrad or average PhD student.

    But the article does not discuss at all general relativity, which IIRC was developed with a Jewish mathematician (Grossmann?). There was a well publicized first confirmation of the theory in 1919, and that may have created a media storm leading to Albert getting more credit than he was due.. but just the same, I have not seen any alternative explanation for the origin of gen. ret.. Like wise, the photoelectric effect, while a simple paper, may have been the first of its type.

  48. Don’t forget the fraud Isaac Newton — alleged father of the Calculus and Gravity but who couldn’t answer questions related to either in a public scientific contest and who was obsessed with alchemy, black magic, occult practices more than anything else.

    “In the eighteenth century and since, Newton came to be thought of as the first and greatest of the modern age of scientists, a rationalist, one who taught us to think on the lines of cold and untinctured reason. I do not see him in this light. I do not think that anyone who has pored over the contents of that box which he packed up when he finally left Cambridge in 1696 and which, though partly dispersed, have come down to us, can see him like that. Newton was not the first of the age of reason. He was the last of the magicians, the last of the Babylonians and Sumerians.” [1]

    _____

    [1]: John Maynard Keynes, “Newton the Man,” in Newton Tercentenary Celebration (Cambridge University Press 1974).

    • Replies: @gay troll
  49. Dumbo says:

    Good article. Well I guess every nation needs its myths.

    Einstein was a fraud and a plagiarist, this is well-known. I think his fame is more because of that picture with the tongue sticking out, because no average person understands “his” theories.

    Edison like Jobs or Gates was primarily a businessman. He dindu invent nothing but he was a “genius” in promoting and in finding talented people to work for him and develop stuff, then taking the credit (it was in the contract).

    In the case of the telephone, the primacy of Meucci is well-known.

    The Wright brothers, I don’t know so much, but it’s obvious tat many people in many places were attempting the same thing at the same time. The airplane, as the television or other famous inventions, does not have a single creator but was born out of a collective effort. Of course people copied each other, everyone wanted to be the “first to fly”.

  50. @Rick Derris

    You’re right about Xerox PARC, and Gates didn’t invent the GUI either. He saw it there.

    But if the employer finances the research, the employee just doing his job puts together something new, the employer has patent rights, hasn’t he?
    .
    Okay, Woz woz his partner. I’ll be amazed if he was excluded from the patent rights. Please educate me.

    • Replies: @Jim Bob Lassiter
  51. The common denominator in all such myths is that they are “systematized delusions”:

    “A “systematized delusion” is one based on a false premise, pursued by a logical process of reasoning to an insane conclusion ; there being one central delusion, around which other aberrations of the mind converge.” Taylor v. McClintock, 112 S.W. 405, 412, 87 Ark. 243. (West’s Judicial Words and Phrases (1914)).

    The people who orchestrate these large scale deceptions are not that bright – they follow a system or template that is easy to manage after the initial establishment of any given myth. Once the anchor false premise has been established for any such myth, the rest of it is relatively easily dealt with as just another aberration of the mind that converges on that central delusion or false premise.

    That is why They always get you at the door.

    Are you in the game?

    Yes.

    Then you lose.

  52. @dearieme

    “As for Einstein, I knew that Special Relativity could as well be attributed to Fitzgerald, Poincare, and Lorentz.” Yes this is true, those physicists had already laid the foundation for SR. Good point . Albert E just elaborated on it, it wasnt all his original work.
    As for the Wright Bros flying the first plane. NO it was proven to be Richard Pierce a farmer/ inventor from New Zealand who flew the first heavier than air machine in NZ’s South Is. Weeks before the Wright Bros flight.

    • Replies: @Biff
  53. @Realist

    Albert Einstein. Smartest man who ever lived?

    Einstein has attained not only special status, but unique meaning. He was unimaginably brilliant. Deep. Profound.

    And very Jewish.

    That is the message. This is what Einstein has come to symbolize: Jewish genius.

    Today, Einstein personifies unrivaled Jewish intellectual capacity.

    Whereas Ann Frank personifies Jewish innocence, Einstein is the manifestation of Jewish intellectual preeminence.

    Bow your heads, inferiors.

    Einstein’s reputation has risen to the level of a demigod.

    He alone figured out How the Universe Works.

    E=MC2. It was all his. Or so the story goes.

    And if you don’t quite get relativity, that’s understandable, too. Jews know many things that the goyim can never understand. That’s another message behind the myth of Einstein.

    But it’s a lot of hooey.

    Here’s my review of a book on Einstein by physicist, Roger Schlafly. Schlafly does not reject all of Einstein’s contributions, but he certainly does bring the Great Professor down to earth, where he belongs; especially since ‘relativity theory’ was equally the work of Lorentz, Poincare and others.

    https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2012/03/24/review-of-roger-schlaflys-how-einstein-ruined-physics/

    • Thanks: Levtraro
    • Replies: @Realist
    , @BlackDragon
    , @Vojkan
  54. 2.dearieme says:

    “Now then, what about Ben Franklin and the kite-and-lightning experiment: also bunkum?”

    46.Boldizar says:

    “Franklin was standing right next to Washington’s freshly cut cherry tree when it happened.”

    .

    In the category of Boldizar’s “tearing away the past valor of the American Society”, I regret to inform you that Ben Franklin’s famous electrocution kite experiment is another cute fabricated historical myth, as was George Washington’s “Father, I cannot tell a lie” cherry tree episode.

    Here is one reference to the specific topic. There are many others even though Google can’t remember how to find them.

    Benjamin Franklin’s ‘faked kite experiment’

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/3308983/Benjamin-Franklin-faked-kite-experiment.html

  55. FatR says:

    So, Mr. Romanoff, you believe that the past is 95% falsified (by some conspiracy that somehow forged literal square kilometers of boring everyday documentation and memoirs which are of interest only to a few enthusiast historians per decade). What makes you think that any or all of the documents on which you base your denunciations are not, in turn, forged, besides the fact that you like their contents?

    Also, why is it that every single conspirologist trying to slander Jews always does it in a way that ultimately gives them all the more credit, and leads to inescapable conclusion that they indeed possess superior intelligence and foresight?

    • Replies: @annamaria
  56. Regarding ‘nuclear bombs’ discussed by Einstein as above, that is maybe the biggest historical fraud of all

    Hiroshima was napalmed, the 1945 ‘nuclear bombs’ were clearly hoaxed

    The ‘smoking gun’ eventually showed up from US war records, showing that a 66-plane napalm firebombing feet, bombed Hiroshima that day … It seems nuclear weapons have never existed, a collusive hoax of countries stealing trillions and spreading terror

    https://www.henrymakow.com/2020/07/nuclear-bombs-do-not-exist.html

    • Agree: Johnny Walker Read
    • Troll: Gordo
  57. Jiminy says:

    I believe the same can apply to Darwin’s theory of evolution as well. There was a man by the name of Wallace who did a lot of investigative work on wildlife in the Indonesian islands, and developed a written theory that he then sent off to Darwin. The rest is history.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  58. @syonredux

    The books children’s books about Einstein in the library certainly discuss his coming to live and die in the United States and discuss his letter about the potential for an atomic bomb.

    One thing I noticed very recently, without ever thinking about it, is that I couldn’t recall having seen footage of an interview or speech of Einstein in any English language documentary. Einstein’s very poor English and the limited material is incompatible with viewing him as the God of Science. His sneering German doesn’t fit either.

  59. GeeBee says:
    @Just another serf

    It’s always mildly surprising to me when I read a comment such as yours. I – wrongly – assume that most people by now are at least aware of, if not exactly familiar with, so-called ‘holocaust revisionism’. I first looked into the subject around ten years ago, when I became aware of the revisionist position. I did so because I was outraged that anyone might challenge such a uniquely appalling phenomenon as the extermination of the Jews by the evil Nazis. There was just so much evidence that proved it beyond any shadow of a doubt.

    Imagine my surprise, therefore, when I soon discovered that I was woefully wrong in this belief, and that I had embarked upon a journey that, although I could not have known it at the time, radically changed my life. It turned my entire world-view around through 180 degrees. And I was well into my fifties at the time. What I found was the same as everyone else who researches this subject. Only those ‘with a dog in the race’ ever claim to have researched the holocaust and not had their prior beliefs shaken to the core.

    It has almost reached the stage whereby Yad Vashem – the guardians of the Holyhoax (as we who are aware refer to it) – are on the point of debating whether they ought to ‘ditch’ the Auschwitz gassings for good and re-focus the so-called exterminations solely on the Aktion Reinhard camps (Treblinka, Sobibor etc), together with a little more emphasis on the actions of the Einzatzgruppen in Russia.

    Yad Vashem long ago admitted that there were no gassings in any of the camps located in Germany (Belsen, Dachau, Ravensbrook, Buchenwald etc etc) where harrowing reports of mass exterminations via ‘gas chambers’ formed a large part of the original ‘eye witness’ accounts. They have all been shown to have been lies, as have those focussed on Auschwitz, but not too many people are aware of this, as the holocaust propaganda, far from ever letting up, actually gathers momentum as year succeeds year, for the very good reason that it is vitally important for the Jews to have their ‘get out of jail free’ card handy , whenever any criticism pf their parasitic ways looms on the horizon. “But we’re the victims!” they wail; “Remember the holocaust”.

    I heartily recommend that you do your own research and form your own conclusions. but I strongly suspect that I know what those will be!

  60. gotmituns says:

    Einstein was never in the league of Newton or Kepler.

    • Replies: @Hiram of Tyre
  61. His view of ethical science was like building a tower where each person adds one stone and, if I add the last stone, I not only take credit for the entire design and construction of the tower, but I own the building.

    Which, I suppose, makes Einstein as American as apple pie.

    Too many years ago, I was glancing through the Air Force Times and I spotted a picture of a General putting a ceiling tile into place, with the headline, “General Completes Operations Center.” It’s how the US rolls.

    The rest of the world envies the US for having the chutzpah to sell fizzy sugar water to them at grossly inflated prices, but they buy nevertheless, because they aren’t buying fizzy sugar water; they are buying a small piece of the American Dream.

  62. @Reg Cæsar

    “Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.”

    It seems no sillier than current electoral politics. I’m all for a return to feudalism, but only because I already own a castle.

    • Replies: @GeeBee
  63. @dearieme

    Now then, what about Ben Franklin and the kite-and-lightning experiment…?

    Misquoted. He was kiting cheques, and it proved to be so popular that that to this day, the USA remains one of the few nations with widespread use of cheques in daily commerce.

  64. padre says:
    @IvyMike

    I gather, you must have spent your life time, to research all those things, since you are so adamant!

  65. Franz says:

    Very interesting read. A few salient points.

    First, the USA did not easily grow into the idea of “intellectual property rights” until very late.

    Leaving inventions for a moment, European books with massive sales were made in the States without one dime in royalties paid to the copyright holders. Arthur Conan Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes books were selling here in the millions, all pirated copies. Victor Hugo, another favorite from his first book on, never got a pittance from the US. And was furious when an American translator retitled his book Notre Dame de Paris as The Hunchback of Notre Dame, a title he despised.

    When at long last the US signed on to international copyright enforcement, it bitched at the old Soviet Union for doing the same thing they did for a century.

    Second. The Wright Brothers.

    It wasn’t the US that claimed the Wright’s to be way ahead of the game, it was the French after the brothers demonstrated a later-than-Kitty-Hawk version of their aircraft.

    In Ohio especially, and the Dayton newspaper in particular, the Wrights were lambasted as couple of hicks and cranks. For good measure, there were condemnations on the national level also. See any good biography for the crap they put up with.

    But at the French air show, even though a fatality occurred on one flight, the Wright’s system was seen as superior to all the earlier attempts.

    Santos-Dumont, Lillienthal and so on were really hit and miss. Stiff winds kept both from flying at all in some instances, and the other restrictions were typical of the half-a-loaf they all brought to the table.

    The Wright Brothers had the whole caboodle, and it still informs every plane that flies. No one had that much in one place so early, and no essential needed to be added afterward. Even when jet engines were added, the basics remained.

    • Thanks: Ann Nonny Mouse
    • Replies: @psbindy
  66. Anonymous[661] • Disclaimer says:

    Interesting article. I’ve always been fascinated by the real history behind some of the great historical myths.

    I’m looking forward to this author’s book.

  67. mcohen says:

    Larry.is this you on Facebook

    Ro man off.

    LARRY ROMANOFF – Facebook – 登录或注册
    LARRY ROMANOFF: The Western media quickly took the stage and laid out the official narrative for the outbreak of the new coronavirus which appeared to…

    https://m.facebook.com/GlobalResearchCRG/posts/3083689728309473

    Global research from Canada is naughty site LARRY.Why is Facebook allowing this stuff.
    .

  68. @Magic Dirt Resident

    You said:

    “The worst part is the propaganda has been so intense that 99.9% of people will think you’re a nut for stating these claims publicly.” [emphasis mine]

    George Orwell said:

    “The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those that speak it.”

    … and ain’t that the truth!

  69. Bas says:

    In the end someone above did the usual. Resulting in one step forward. On a road life on this planet have no clue leading to.

  70. In the end NEGROS still never invented anything. Bwaaaahahahahhaahahahaha. And this –“His view of ethical science was like building a tower where each person adds one stone and, if I add the last stone, I not only take credit for the entire design and construction of the tower, but I own the building.” Blackz in a nutshell.Doing the same BS. We Wuz Kangz an sheit!

    • LOL: Ragnar White
  71. S says:
    @Larry Romanoff

    The theory is more than plausible if you are familiar with the heavily-evidenced proposition that the underlying purpose of both world wars was the total destruction of Germany.

    The Germanics have dominated Europe for the past 1500 plus years, and within the past 500 years it has been Europe which has come to dominate the world.

    Therefore, if you want total world power for yourself, it would make sense that you would target for conquest Europe’s center of power, the primary population center of Germanics in Europe, ie Germany.

    Both the Capitalist thesis and Communist anti-thesis wings of the manufactured and broadly controlled (from London) Hegelian Dialectic which has been at play since 1776 and 1789 describe Germany in this way in their respective geo-political writings.

    They tell us before hand of their intentions, too.

    The below linked excerpt was published in 1853 in the United States and is from the book The New Rome; or, the United States of the World*. It describes how a ‘world’s war’ is to be unleashed upon the Earth when a future US/UK united front (‘the Anglo-Saxon empire’) makes it’s move to conquer and gain control of Germany.

    This was over sixty years before WWI.

    In 1912, on the eve of the Great War, A Political Prophecy (linked below) was published in the United States. It provides analysis of The New Rome in addition to having the biographies of the book’s two authors, Theodore Poesche and Charles Goepp.

    Poesche’s participation in Germany’s failed 1848 Revolution, his fleeing to London where he resided for a time along with other revolutionaries such as Mazzini, his immigrating to the United States where he had a succesful career in Washington DC as an employee of the US government, and, at the German ambassador’s request, Poesche’s traveling to Europe to meet personally with German Chancellor Bismarck in Berlin, are all described.

    Question. Did Theodore Poesche attempt to warn Bismarck of the calamity that was to befall Germany, which he had written of in his book decades earlier?

    [See the Majority Rights links below for excerpts from The New Rome and the archive.org links (also linked below) for the original scanned in source materials.]

    The New Rome (1853) – pg 105

    That great uprising of all peoples, that world’s war which is for ever seen to hang, like the sword of Damocles, over the passing joys and troubles of the hour, will fall when the Anglo-Saxon empire shall lay its slow but unyielding grasp upon the countries of the Germanic confederation.

    * A premise of this generally unknown, but, intriguing book, is that the 1776 Revolution had been a planned false split between the US and UK from the very beginning, ie that the Revolutionary War had been ‘thrown’ by the British Empire in favor of the United States.

    https://majorityrights.com/weblog/comments/the_new_rome_or_the_united_states_of_the_world_1853/

    https://majorityrights.com/weblog/comments/the_new_rome_or_the_united_states_of_the_world_1853/#c89763

    https://archive.org/details/newrome00poes/page/n7/mode/2up

    https://archive.org/details/politicalprophec00goeb

    • Thanks: Alfred
    • Replies: @Wade
  72. GMC says:

    Sort like – we live in a great democracy, we live with the Bill of Rights and a grand Constitution, that gives every American the right to persue life, liberty and justice. We are All Created Equal and anyone can have the American Dream or grow up to be President of this country. Or ” We can guage the greatness of a country , on how many people are waiting in line to be allowed in, how many people are waiting to be let into Russia or China ” ? We are spreading Democracy and setting the People in Iraq, Afghanistan, LIbya, Syria, et. – Free from their terrorist Dictators. All Bull Shit unless you are one of Obama’s Exceptional People. Yea – Larry Romanoff !

  73. Moi says:
    @one_for_truth

    Agree. Although Hindus claims that just about everything (e.g. airplanes) is described in their earliest scriptures.

  74. onebornfree says: • Website
    @brabantian

    The famous photo of the “nuclear explosion ” at Nagasaki is a complete fraud. See: “The Nuke Hoax”: http://www.cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?f=28&t=452&sid=b9c9c643260fe4512ba7e0e4ed6dccee

    Also, the films of the nuclear tests, regardless of country, all appear to be wholly fraudulent, made in studio creations. Many [all?] of the alleged US test films were created at the secret Lookout Mountain movie studios in CA. See same link given.

    The same photo/film fakery idea applies to the alleged moon landings, [as I’m sure you already know]. See: ” Apollo Hoax”: http://www.cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=479&sid=02fb1dd9153262a9d7461b93a1fe2d2d

    But wait- there’s more! :

    The original US MSM 5 station “live” broadcasts on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001, depicting :1] Fl. 175 striking WTC2, [2] the top-down collapse of WTC2, [3] the top down collapse of WTC1, [4] The bottom up collapse of WTC7, was/is all fake, that is, its all 100% computer generated imagery [CGI].

    See: http://onebornfrees911researchreview.blogspot.com/2019/12/the-911-scam-faked-live-msm-imagery.html

    Regards, onebornfree

    • Replies: @Joe Stalin
  75. anon[327] • Disclaimer says:

    Ron,I have a question

    Is meena commenting on this site and are you aware of this.

    Just a plain yes or no

  76. Moi says:
    @Boldizar

    Washington’s many slaves were also in attendance. 🙂

  77. Anon[123] • Disclaimer says:

    There is a lie.
    Then there are Damn Lies.
    Then there is 911.

    Keep in mind Satan has a PhD too.
    PhD in Deception!

    By way of Deception.

  78. @Svevlad

    I just had my morning tea with this fine article. Now I am super curious.

  79. @Realist

    I think he meant it in the context of all the historical falsehoods.

  80. @sergei32

    You do realise that when the USA starts to circle the bowl, it intends to take the rest of the world with it, or did you overlook that part? The big choice for the USA is to continue to suffer internal fragmentation and civil strife, or to start the next world war. Only one choice solves all its problems, especially given its propensity to overlook unintended consequences … which do you think they might choose?

    • Replies: @jiri
  81. I thought I might add something to help make a point. I stated in the introduction to this paper that probably 90% or even 95% of everything we believe about history is wrong, and that fully half of the pages in our history book are blank. Those claims were not made lightly. The buried and distorted history of our world is literally everywhere. It may be true that no historical event of any consequence is not photoshopped.

    For example, everyone knows that millions of Chinese came to North America (Canada and the US) to help build the railroads, and later to work the gold mines. But nobody knows that those Chinese did not come willingly. They were almost all kidnapped by Jewish slave traders and brought forcibly to North America as free labor for the owners of the railroads – their friends. This was part of Rothschild’s British East India Company that specialized in slave trading along with growing and selling opium, plundering and killing. Millions of Indians were kidnapped and sold as slaves in the same manner but apparently the Chinese were more profitable. Nevertheless, it was the same group of people continuing their slave trading as they had been doing for at least the prior 500 years. That’s why there are Chinese all over the world.

    The Chinese were initially kidnapped from Fujian province but eventually so many millions had been kidnapped and taken away that Fujian was in anarchy and any Jew daring to set foot on Fujian shores was instantly killed on sight. It was so bad that the slave traders abandoned Fujian and turned to Zhuhai and Guangdong, and continued. It was only the First World War that finally put a stop to it.

    The reason nobody knows is that the kidnappers were on very close terms with those who held control of the historical airbrush, as they still do today. And today, nobody will touch the story. Only one Canadian historical website makes any reference to this, in a passing comment about some “questionable practices” in the “importation” of Chinese to work on the railroads.

  82. vot tak says:

    Most american “history” is fabrication printed by the press that later was mythologised as factual. Fiction, advert copy and propaganda that later magically became factual history. This started much earlier than 100 years ago. Reference the work of washington irving in the early 19th century.

    Regarding the Wright brothers, americans are indoctrinated to believe that they invented the airplsne and were the first humans to fly. North carolina vehicle license plate carry the phrase “first in flight”. Their real claimed first is actually “first to fly a powered, heavier-than-air machine in controlled, sustained flight”.

    People had been flying balloons since the 1700s. Several managed to get airbourne in heavier than air gliders in the 19th century, Lilienthal being a famous one, who’s work was a large influence on the Wright brothers, btw. Others managed to actually get a contraption aloft with a motor, both lighter and heavier than air vehicles. Hiram Maxim, of the machine gun fame, being one who did the later.

    What the Wrights did was marry Lilienthal’s control to a powered heavier than air airframe that could remain aloft for more than a short hop. And they deserve credit for that. They were not frauds in that respect. Greedy control freaks, yes, though. At the 1908 Le Mans airshow, their first european exposure, they made a huge impression with their aircraft. And this was a surprise as they were not really known in europe and most european aviation had occured independently from them along different lines.

    The european designs later overtook that of the Wrights, by 1912 their aircraft designs were an anachronism. A dead end. By that time one of the brothers had died and while the surviving brother continued aircraft design, Wright did better at making aircraft engines.

    A little irony. Two of the more famous names in british aviation were americans who emigrated to britain and acquired british citizenship. Maxim and Cody. The latter a relative of Buffalo Bill Cody. Cody designed aircraft based upon Wright design ideas. The Wrights influenced another famous early brit aviator, Rolls, of Rolls Royce, who flew Wright aircraft.

    • Thanks: Sick of Orcs
  83. “History is a set of lies agreed upon. I caught you a delicious bass.” –Napoleon Bonaparte

  84. Vojkan says:

    Einstein is as relevant to the the history of science as Indiana Jones is to the storyline of the Raiders of the Lost Ark.

  85. Emily says:
    @Ultrafart the Brave

    Very interesting article.
    Thank you.
    But that is merely the very tip of the history we are not allowed to know.
    The merest tip of the truth..
    Take a look at the best selling author.
    Michael Cremo..
    The Hidden History of mankind.
    Forbidden Archaeology etc.
    It would appear that we have reached the technological age before – yep flight and even possibly nuclear weapons.
    But we are left to believe in the total nonsense that we came out of the caves at the time we did.
    Did we come out of the caves as survivors of the kind of conflict being forced on the planet largely by the USA today?
    Um!
    http://mcremo.com/
    As for this Ultra
    ‘ The British Empire, as savage as any other, invented concentration camps to deal with the Boers in Southern Africa.’
    Yes indeed.
    Created by the ‘hero’ of scouting Baden Powell.
    It is actually documented that over 26,000 women and children died in those camps of starvation, typhoid and other ills.
    It was actual and deliberate genocide..
    Holding their families hostage and dying to force the Boers to finally surrender and for the British to occupy and thereby steal and plunder the two Boer Republics.
    A totally illegal act.
    God and diamonds being the prize.
    One of the biggest and ugliest blots on our British nation.

  86. @Barr

    … Pilgrims left on Mayfair ….

    I used to live in Mayfair, and I don’t recall seeing any Pilgrims. I guess because they had embarked on Mayflower.

    The Boston Tea Party was a ruse to prevent the British East India Company from undercutting colonial tea smugglers, but the Revolution was about a whole host of issues including the freedom to appropriate native lands on which the Crown had monopoly power to purchase from the natives and re-sell for further settlement, again cutting off the profits of the locals who wanted to be in that lucrative trade.

    • Agree: Hibernian
  87. @Larry Romanoff

    So, your next piece will be on the Opium Wars?

  88. Realist says:
    @mark green

    How is your response pertinent to my comment?

  89. Anonymous[208] • Disclaimer says:
    @Barr

    Mayflower, not Mayfair. And that is complete and total nonsense. They weren’t even in England, they were in Holland. They left England because they did not want to attend church of England services, which was mandatory under English law. They also wanted to conduct their own services, which was even more illegal. They had no desire nor made any attempt to impose anything on anyone. They left Holland for the new world because the Dutch were immoral degenerates and their children were being corrupted.

    • Replies: @Sya Beerens
  90. Re: Roentgen

    @ Romanoff

    Very interesting read – thank you.
    When you are interested in honest history you will unavoidably find that history is mostly (80% ?) fake
    – political history is (always) dictated by the victors (idea: the victors were virtuous and the enemy was wrong or evil).
    – scientific history is often dictated by thieves (idea: I want to be the one who gets the honor and/or the materiel benefits)

    I remember reading an article ( a long time ago) about Roentgen (Germany) which said that Roentgen stole the invention of X-Rays from another German who did (unfortunately) not come from a rich family.
    I also remember an article about Pasteur (the supposed inventor of vaccination) which said that he stole the invention from a country vet who had noticed that people who had been infected by cowpox never got smallpox and who wanted people to know about this possibility of protection.

    For what it’s worth.

  91. dickr says:
    @Ultrafart the Brave

    My Boer great grandmother was born in a British concentration camp, administered by the jewish commissioners of the queen. The queen never paid reparations to the Boers. I could never understand why Boers supported Israel, since their worst enemies were foremost the jews, then the British, and only then the black tribes.
    David Hilbert did all the math for Einstein, which is why the media ignore him. It was common knowledge in Göttingen until after the war

  92. Perhaps the most damning evidence was when in 1953 Sir Edmund Whittaker published a very detailed account of the origin and development of all these theories and equations of physics, with extensive reference to the primary sources, documenting beyond doubt that Einstein had no priority in any of it, and clearly stating so. Einstein was alive and well when Whittaker published his book, yet he offered no dispute to the conclusions, no refutation of Whittaker’s claim that he (Einstein) had been irrelevant to the entire process. Einstein made no attempts in his own defense but simply hid in the bushes and refused to make any public comment whatever.

    1. I do not believe this is true.

    2. The footnote number nine is lazy citation. Whittaker’s book in the Dover edition is over 700 pages long and Romanoff writes that Whittaker refutes Einstein and the footnote shows this is in Whittaker’s 700 page book. Somewhere. On what page is it?

    I am skeptical that Romanoff has read more than twenty pages of Whittaker’s book. It is slow reading.

    3. Yes Einstein was lionized but why lie about it? The speed of light is a constant irregardless of relative motion between source and observation. This was a brilliant innovation and a hundred amazing calculable and experimental results follow and it was Albert Einstein’s. Bohr, Heisenberg, Pauli, et al all agreed Einstein was their peer.

    And Whittaker did too.

    • Replies: @Vojkan
  93. @one_for_truth

    Your sarcasm detector needs servicing…

    • Replies: @one_for_truth
  94. Biff says:
    @BlackDragon

    No it was proven to be Richard Pierce a farmer/ inventor from New Zealand who flew the first heavier than air machine in NZ’s South Is. Weeks before the Wright Bros flight.

    I lived in NZ for a bit in the 80’s, and everyone kept mentioning that NZ was the first in flight.

  95. At least we should credit the men in the article to know where to find these patents and which one to steal. I mean that is rather ingenious in a perverse kinda of way.

  96. anon[103] • Disclaimer says:

    You forgot to mention Buckminster Fuller and his “inventions”.

    R. Buckminster Fuller, in full Richard Buckminster Fuller, (born July 12, 1895, Milton, Massachusetts, U.S.—died July 1, 1983, Los Angeles, California), American engineer, architect, and futurist who developed the geodesic dome

    Source is Britanica, not some US propaganda outfit: https://www.britannica.com/biography/R-Buckminster-Fuller

    The enemy of mankind resides in the City of London. All else is secondary matter, Mr. Romanoff.

  97. @Biff

    No it was proven to be Richard Pierce a farmer/ inventor from New Zealand who flew the first heavier than air machine in NZ’s South Is. Weeks before the Wright Bros flight.

    I lived in NZ for a bit in the 80’s, and everyone kept mentioning that NZ was the first in flight.

    Ironic, ain’t it, given NZ’s most famous bird is flightless.

  98. Barr says:
    @Priss Factor

    Thanks. Religious ideas also flow from the existing ones around the new religion. So are the laws and the morality . We change from something that were already there more or less serving similar functions and one day simply no longer were able to deliver,or satisfy our tastes ,or were hurtful or inefficient.
    This is why the the long term patents on ideas are so much counterintuitive from the perspective of innovation and progress . A fine balance between making enough profits and keeping the door open for further developments are of crucial importance for the nation.

  99. Truth3 says:

    Wikipedia is renowned as being virtually useless as an information source due to widespread ideological bias and censorship.

    Wikipedia is a well known example of Jews hijacking any possible vehicle for spreading their propaganda and lies.

    Hey… Jew Lies Matter!

  100. @Auntie Analogue

    To build on your excellent comment, the issue at the time was not “heavier than air flight”, several inventors had managed to get off the ground with what amounted to short hops, and a German had produced equations to calculate wing design, but no one had achieved CONTROLLED FLIGHT of any length, and as you said, control on three axes was critical to avoid fatal accidents(and they developed the mechanical apparatus usable from the pilot position). The Wright’s created other technical innovations “wing warping” for turns(and the pilot technique of “banking” for a turn), the wind tunnel for testing(perhaps their most important invention), they found and corrected a flaw in aforesaid German’s wing design equations, and they designed and had built an aluminum block powerplant suitable for practical aeroplane use(IIRC the first aluminum block engine ever). They showed the world the result in Paris to cheering crowds of thousands flying circles and figure eights. The French had an aeronautical society with hundreds of members but two unknown Americans showed the world how it is done. An overlooked achievement of the Wright’s is they developed the first model for a comprehensive Research And Development Program through their need to solve a myriad of complex technical problems integrated to produce a single successful system.

  101. @Anonymous

    And they lived happily ever after……..

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  102. Truth3 says:

    By the way… Daniel Okrent is a massive farce himself.

  103. Truth3 says:

    Einstein the Ass deserves his own phrase…

    Jew Lies about Matter… Matter!

  104. ruralguy says:

    In Math/Physics books/papers the attribution for the special theory of relativity is more broad. A key part of this theory is the Lorentz transform that preserves metrics (measurements) between different frames of reference, while preserving the speed of light as a constant. Another key part of the theory is a hyperbolic geometry, because to keep the speed of light constant, you need a hyperbolic geometry. The transforms and in-variances should be attributed to MANY mathematicians and physicists. Surprisingly, many of these concepts were worked out in the 1800s, including key parts of the math of quantum physics. Only in the public is it misattributed. They like to celebritize it all, attributing it to one person.

  105. Greg Bacon says: • Website
    @dearieme

    I knew that the Edison light bulb tale (and the Edison vs Tesla tale) were bunk – as anyone can see by looking at Wikipedia.

    Wikipedia? I hope this is a satirical comment about the Biggest Lies in History on Wiki.

    The only think I use Wiki for is to get the links at the bottom, NOT for actual research.

    Wiki claims to be open to all, but on certain subjects, like the phony Holocau$t ™ and Israel–notice how those are related?–they close down the topic so no one can dispute their revisionist history.

    One of the biggest historical fraud is for Wikipedia to ignore that those TBTF Wall Street banks, the ones we Goyim bailout every 10 years or so?
    Wiki conveniently ignores that some of those TBTF banks were in existence back in 1711 when Wall Street was a slave market. Come to think of it, never got that info in High School or College, for some reason.

    Wall Street Was a Slave Market Before It Was a Financial Center

    https://www.huffpost.com/entry/wall-street-was-a-slave-m_b_1208536

    I’d like to see how much NYC Mayor holds back the NYPD if the BLM thugs started busting up one of those slaver banks.

    • Replies: @dearieme
  106. @Ann Nonny Mouse

    “But if the employer finances the research, the employee just doing his job puts together something new, the employer has patent rights, hasn’t he?”

    Most assuredly, especially if there is a well crafted contract of employment (as there almost always is for jobs at R&D and engineering levels).

  107. @Larry Romanoff

    I watched that little whore, Nayirah, on tv and I did NOT believe her or her promoters in the Congress. I won’t be surprised she had been married off to a Saudi right after her lachrymose lies and is now a grandmother of hundreds “princes and princesses” in the desert!

  108. @Bombercommand

    Also, the undercambered airfoil section used by the Wrights bears little resemblance to that of an aboriginal’s boomerang.

  109. Johann says:
    @Ultrafart the Brave

    I know a local man who told me that he was drafted into the US Army in 1960. He told me he was stationed in Germany and was a guard at Dachau Prison Camp which was now run by the US Army. I knew that many of the former German Concentration Camps were kept open by the Soviet Army in Eastern Germany but never knew about the American use of Dachau. Of course the average American public school student might have been told about the American prison camps for native Japanese once in his 12 year indoctrination experience compared to the one million times he was lectured about German Camps. I was also aware that the British Army invented the modern Concentration Camp during the Boer War where tens of thousands of Boer women and children died under British imprisonment . I believe it was Napoleon who said that history books were written by the winners.

    • Thanks: Ultrafart the Brave
  110. dearieme says:
    @Ultrafart the Brave

    Concentration camps, in the modern era, aren’t the brainchild of Germany or Japan. The British Empire, as savage as any other, invented concentration camps to deal with the Boers in Southern Africa.

    Much quoted but quite untrue. They started with the Spanish in Cuba and continued with the Americans in the Philippines. The British came only third on this roll of dishonour. Even that is essentially Nazi propaganda, since in none of those three examples was the purpose the same as the Nazi’s.

    Concentration camp in that older sense were used in WWII by the USA for its Japanese citizens and residents. Again, deeply unpleasant but not much like the Nazi’s.

  111. dearieme says:
    @Greg Bacon

    There are plenty of other sources on Edison and the light bulb: he lost his patent case against Swan and had to buy the guy out.

    The whole Edison/Tesla tale is just an example of American parochialism. The key advances were all made elsewhere. It’s easy enough to check Wikipedia’s sources on the matter or, I’d guess, to pick up any book on the history of the commercialisation of electricity that wasn’t written to butter up an American readership.

  112. @Larry Romanoff

    According to Gaddafi’s endless YouTube tirades and cries for help, it was the opposite. The CIA’s doped up missionaries were rampaging the place posing as “his own people” as usual.

    ~Accuse the other side of that which you are doing~

    That’s how to interpret the dictated news

  113. 112.Really No Shit says:

    “I watched that little whore, Nayirah, on tv and I did NOT believe her or her promoters in the Congress.”

    Her real name is Nijirah Al-Sabah. She is the daughter of Saud Bin Nasir Al-Sabah, the Kuwaiti ambassador to the US & Canada. She is also a member of the Kuwaiti Royal Family. Hill & Knowlton were on a US$600,000 contract with the Kuwaiti government to do some PR and brand-building, and they concocted that little tale.

    A bit odd they would go for so brazen a lie. The girl was living in DC with her parents and surely some members of Congress had to know who she was. That project may have simply been a stage play where everyone knew the rules and was done for the benefit of the uninformed TV audience.

  114. dearieme says:
    @Anon

    Yeah but the Puritans are presented as being the originators of the USA because … because The North won the Civil War.

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
  115. @Auntie Analogue

    “Others flew before the Wright Brothers, but none of them understood or had mastered control of aircraft in all three axes of flight”

    Right, so it’s the simplistic “First in Flight” meme which needs debunking — not the talent and inventiveness of the Wright Brothers.

  116. peterike says:

    Whatever the truth or not of Mr. Romanoff’s claims, he can rest easy in that school children in America are taught little, maybe nothing, about Edison, the Wright Brothers, and Bell. These are, after all, dead white men, the less said about the better.

    Children are, however, taught a great deal about the Most Important American’s Ever, such as Harriet Tubman, Martin Luther King Jr., Emitt Till, Rosa Parks, Martin Luther King Jr., Harriet Tubman, Rosa Parks and Emitt Till. And yes, Einstein. They learn a lot about gays and recycling too.

    We were much better off when children learned patriotic history, however “false.”

  117. annamaria says:
    @Realist

    The fawning biography of Einstein by Walter Isaacson is a fantastic example of the ethnic fealty trumping decency and truth any day.

    The introduction betrays a complete ignorance in math & physics but displays expertise in ethnic pride; the combination of ignorance and pride made Isaakson into a ‘dithyrambist’ for the Plagiarizer.
    Who is Walter Isaacson? — A University Professor of History at Tulane, CEO of the Aspen Institute, chairman of CNN, and editor of Time magazine. He had privileged access to all available documents, and he used the access to propagate a bald-faced Lie. We can safely assume that Mr. Isaacson’s way of mental operation is fundamentally opportunistic. One cannot find a hint of human dignity in this excuse of a man.

    • Thanks: Ann Nonny Mouse
    • Replies: @Realist
  118. @Bombercommand

    … but no one had achieved CONTROLLED FLIGHT of any length….

    No, but some achieved spectacular CFIT.

    • LOL: Bombercommand, JMcG
  119. @gotmituns

    Einstein was never in the league of Newton or Kepler.

    Actually, Newton and Einstein were in the exact same league: both frauds who were elevated to serve an agenda.

    The likes of Kepler, Leibniz et al. were the real brains. I covered the matter here (starts at comment no.136 and continues with an exchange with Saggy, ivan and glib):

    https://www.unz.com/ishamir/coronavirus-conspiracies/#new_comments

    • Troll: Saggy
    • Replies: @gay troll
  120. @Bill Jones

    Really??? Actually it is YOUR sarcasm detector that is in need of servicing. Look at the context of the inapt remark of @ another anon and maybe you’ll then understand.

  121. Akindle says:

    Another attack on white men that includes a Jew. Yes, Edison had a lab of people that harnessed electricity. Is UNZ mad that Edison and Bell were not Jews? So Einstein was a Jew. Is UNZ jealous? Next thing you know UNZ will be declaring that African blacks created everything these men accomplished. Suck it, UNZ.

    • Replies: @Anon
  122. @dearieme

    … because The North won the Civil War.

    Considering the Great Migration, did it really?

  123. Agent76 says:

    August 27, 2019 The Power to Oversee the Education System, A Historical Timeline from the Prussian Empire to the Rockefeller Dynasty

    Throughout history, the idea of those in power to oversee the education system started in the 16th Century.

    http://silentcrownews.com/wordpress/?p=6202

    09/22/2016 Indoctrination: 35 Years of the US Department of Education

    Since 1980, during the Carter Administration, America’s K-12 education system has come under increasing control by the dictates of the federal Department of Education (DOE) with failing results, taxing states and filtering the money through Washington to return a portion of it back to the states.

    https://mises.org/wire/indoctrination-35-years-us-department-education

    Jul 29, 2013 The Origins of the American Public Education System

    In the 1830’s, American Lawmaker Horace Mann visited Prussia and researched its education methodology.

    • Replies: @ThreeCranes
  124. GeeBee says:
    @The Alarmist

    I’m all for a return to feudalism, but only because I already own a castle.

    I doubt you’d want the responsibility. That’s the crucial point between Traditionalism and Modernism. Under feudalism and monarchy, those in charge had a heavy burden of responsibility towards their subjects. Today, it’s the oligarchs who are in charge, and they couldn’t give the proverbial flying f–k about ‘we, the people’ (if I might be forgiven for butchering nominative and accusative case pronouns).

    As for the loathsome breed of professional politicians who nominally hold the reins, they are not merely puppets of the oligarchs, but would sell their souls to the devil for a handful of votes in a marginal constituency. ‘Between the devil and the deep blue sea’ is apt. We are caught between the Scylla of parliaments and the Charybdis of the venal parasites that actually sway the rod of empire.

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
  125. Alfred says:
    @Emily

    Gold and diamonds being the prize.

    • Replies: @Emily
  126. @Larry Romanoff

    Thanks for this article. I hope your book(s) cover the US Army theft of the contents of the German Patent Office post WWII.

    I won’t disagree with Fred Reed’s description, as I have never personally witnessed a tank being mortally hit. However, I suggest that no Libyan soldier jumped out of a mortally hit tank. I have heard, from soldiers, that the contents of a mortally hit tank are like the contents of a blender. Disabled tank yes.

  127. Kapyong says:
    @DustyBear

    Do you have a reference to the “Australian who had recorded it years before”?

    Never heard of such.
    But there was a little-known New Zealander sometimes mentioned for early flight – Richard William Pearse (Mad Dick or Bamboo Dick) :

    https://teara.govt.nz/en/biographies/3p19/pearse-richard-william

  128. Thank you for revealing truths in the midst of lies.

    In my almost 70 years, I have learned the following:

    a) When I was 6 I realized the Easter Bunny could not be real. Rabbits don’t lay candy eggs.

    b) When I was 7, I realized that Santa Clause could not be real. He could not fit down the chimney, could not visit every house, and how could he carry all the stuff?

    c) At 15, I realized the Jesus myth could not be actual history. That is just not the way the world works.

    d) At 40, I realized the whole “War over Slavery” story was a myth. Nobody goes to war to do something nice for someone else. No one kills half a million of their own people to free someone else’s slaves. Lincoln said in his First Inaugural Address that he will not go to war over the issue of slavery, but he would attack the Confederate States if they did not pay pay their taxes or if they attacked one of his forts. It was a tax rebellion and it was put down with ruthless slaughter.

    e) At 50, I realized the Jewish Holocaust Myth was just propaganda. If the Germans wanted to kill the Jews they would have shot them. Instead, You want us to believe the Germans shipped them a hundred miles and housed them in a camp for 2 years, fed them, clothed them, gave them medical care, managed them, etc. And then, after 2 years, they engaged in a ridiculous Dr. Evil type of stunt to trick them into going into the shower so they can gas them. And where are the documents of the German military describing this operation?

    f) At 60, I realized there is no objective space-time as we see it. We are spirits, and our visual field of space-time-energy-matter is an appearance, as Parmenides said 2500 years ago.

    • Thanks: Bleuazur
    • Replies: @ThreeCranes
  129. @dearieme

    Concentration camp in that older sense were used in WWII by the USA for its Japanese citizens and residents. Again, deeply unpleasant but not much like the Nazi’s.

    And what made those German camps so unpleasant? Was it the electrified death chamber floors? The pedal powered brain bashing machines? The cages with the bears and the eagles? The masturbation machines? The gigantic steam chambers used to steam inmates to death? Or the mythical gas chambers with inward opening wooden doors and plenty of windows?

    Or maybe it was typhus and the the devastation and chaos resulting from trillion of tons of munitions dropped on every square inch of Germany long after the outcome of the war was a certainty.

    • Agree: Curmudgeon
    • Replies: @dearieme
    , @Wizard of Oz
  130. TGD says:

    The original author and so many posters on this thread seem to have stopped taking their meds.

    • Replies: @annamaria
  131. Credit doesn’t usually go to the first person. It usually goes to the first person who makes the invention “stick” in the public’s consciousness.

  132. @Larry Romanoff

    Here they are shoveling bullcrap by the metric tons https://www.hkstrategies.com.
    Hill and Knowlton Strategies, Inc.

  133. Wade says:
    @Larry Romanoff

    There were times when I would abandon my computer and either go for a long walk or down multiple scotches until the emotional shock subsided. The history of MK-ULTRA

    Yes, MK-ULTRA. Congratulations, sir, you wrote the first shock piece on Unz.com that I simply could not complete. I felt exactly as you describe above. It’s hard to believe that such sadistic people can find sanction in the highest levels of our intelligence agencies.

    I’ve heard about the Tavistock Institute but never heard to it referred to as Rothschild’s. Why Rothschild? Where can I find out more info on this and the enigmatic Rothschilds? It’s hard to find reliable information on them. I know that he, Walter R. I believe, was a key player in the zionist movement of the early 20th century and from another article on here, and was likely the zionist-in-chief of the failed communist revolution of 1905, but are there any more reliable sources about them that you know of?

    Recently, btw, I came across a picture of one of the British Rothschild’s (again, Walter I believe) sitting down to dine with both Albert Einstein and Bertrand Russell. Could Rothschild been one of the financiers Einstein had access to for building the first A-Bomb? It looks like they had the opportunity for private discussions that will never been known to history.

    I’d very much like to read an article from you on that subject as well as the Tavistock Institute. I’ve long thought that the Rothschilds, including even Jacob today, basically functioned as a kind of intelligence hub for the world zionist movement in addition to their roll as lender of last resort to many nations. I cannot think of a better top-level “center” for covert information exchange than to have the world’s richest jewish bankers as custodians at it’s top level. Intelligence and financing, together, would produce many synergies for manipulation and extortion. Is the Tavistock Institute another piece of that puzzle?

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
  134. gay troll says:
    @Hiram of Tyre

    Astrology is the mother of all science, civilization, and religion. Study of the sun and stars was prerequisite to the dawn of agriculture. Some scientific theses stand up to investigation, and some do not. But knowledge is gained through observation, trial and error. Alchemy has been rejected as a physical thesis, but only through the experimentation of alchemists was it concluded to be impossible. One should also countenance the notion that alchemy is truly about spiritual, not physical refinement and transmutation. The philosopher’s stone is the treasure of he who loves knowledge. And with it can be exposed the richness of the most basic material.

    • Agree: Voltara, Nosquat Loquat
    • Replies: @anonimo11
    , @Hiram of Tyre
  135. @syonredux

    Ever watched the real world? Everything on TV is staged and makes Hollywood seem realistic….. which is why the so called movie stars dictate the shit out of America

    Clown president and such…

  136. This is where LSD poppin’ hippies go…..

  137. Wade says:
    @teo toon

    about a new constitution created in 1871 and at the same time becoming a corporation

    I’ve always seen references to this but never any authoritative sources. Do you know where more info about this can be found?

    • Replies: @teo toon
  138. @Nick110

    Before the Wright Brothers, there was only talk of flying.

    Whitehead flew and his plane had a rudder.
    There are many claims for witnessed first controlled flight from around the world, but many of those were fatal on landing. The Wright Brothers most valid claim seems to be that they did it twice in a day, and survived, which at the time, was an enormous achievement.

  139. gay troll says:
    @Hiram of Tyre

    From whom did Newton steal the law of universal gravitation?

    • Replies: @anonimo11
  140. @sergei32

    In every country, you will find the immigrants to be the most aggressive and pushy compared to the earlier well settled inhabitants. In north America, with its vast riches and sparsely populated by natives, this aggressiveness led to ‘grab and keep’ enforced by the gun.
    This aggressiveness has permeated their society and the false myths promoted by their ruling elites has kept it going. You can see it in their foreign policy where the ‘Gun’ is the preferred diplomatic tool to resolve disputes with other nations for more than a hundred years.

    • Replies: @Rev. Spooner
  141. Sparkon says:

    Moreover, there exists sufficient evidence the Wrights had access to all that prior knowledge in building their own aircraft, then claimed it as their own. In addition to other design features, the Wright brothers claimed ownership of the curved airfoil – without which no aircraft would ever have gotten off the ground anywhere, but, as one historian noted, “the Wrights stole both the concept and the actual design from an Australian who had recorded it years before, and who had himself deduced the concept from the boomerang of the Australian aboriginals.” The Wright Brothers stole the idea to build their aircraft, then patented it and sued others for using it.

    Hmm. ‘Not so sure about some of these claims. Speaking of overlooked or mangled history, I find it curious there is no mention of the bicycle here. After all, the bicycle is the device that got the Wright brothers into engineering in the first place, and it was the bicycle that helped them solve the airfoil problem:

    They used the Lilienthal data to predict the angle of rotation of the wheel at which the drag of the flat plate would exactly balance the lift of the wing. They attached the wheel to the handles of a bicycle and rode through the streets of Dayton to produce a wind over the models. The test indicated a much lower value of lift from their model than the lift predicted by the Lilienthal data. But the test conditions were hard to control. So the brothers decided to build a wind tunnel to produce a more controlled environment. They would compare the results they found in the wind tunnel to the performance they had measured during their kite and glider flights.

    The wind tunnel tests were conducted from September to December of 1901. At the conclusion of the tests, the brothers had the most detailed data in the world for the design of aircraft wings. They used this data to design the 1902 aircraft which overcame the problems encountered in 1900 and 1901. They also used the data in the design of their propellers for the 1903 aircraft.

    https://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/airplane/wrights/biketest.html

    There were several attempts to make the bicycle fly, but officially, or at least according to Wikipedia, true human-powered flight was not accomplished until 1961, when SUMPAC managed about 600 meters, and an 80 degree turn during 40 attempts.

  142. It’s important to realize physics is a group enterprise. The lone genius is somewhat of a myth, Einstein included. Einstein was a genius but definitely not a lone genius. He himself gives credit to the men who made his theory of special relativity possible. Poincaré, Lorenz and Maxwell are key figures.

    First we discuss Maxwell. James Clerk Maxwell discovered the equations of Electromagnetism. There were separate equations at the time for electricity and magnetism. There were hints of a relationship between electricity and magnetism. What Maxwell did was put the known knowledge into a more complete framework of electromagnetism. What Maxwell then extracted the theory of electromagnetic waves, a theory of light from his unified equations. What Maxwell didn’t know and would probably choose to ignore had he found out, is that 100% of the Theory of Special Relativity already existed in his equations in a hidden form. Even E = m c^2 is lingering in his equations but it’s subtle and difficult to find. In fact there were many earlier discoveries of the mass energy relation but with the wrong constant e.g. 3/8 m c^2 or 1/2 m c^2 or the completely wrong reasoning.

    It was a matter of time before these issues would eventually be tackled. Lorenz called attention to the contraction of an object along its direction of motion, the dilation of time and the non-simultaneity of events. These observations were believed to be preposterous because they flatly contradicted Newton. Something had to be incomplete about Maxwell’s equations. Perhaps they reasoned, the equation could be modified to be compatible with Newton. Poincaré then investigated the symmetries of Maxwell’s equations and found the equations of Special relativity as a result. At this point what existed was a massive contradiction between Maxwell and Newton. The correct equations were there but without a conceptual framework capable of resolving the contradiction. What Einstein did was take physics back to the drawing board and reformulate everything from scratch from general principles. The situation with Poincaré is very similar to the discovery of non-Euclidean geometry. It’s initial discoverers were aware of the radical nature and avoided controversy by not discussing it (Gauss) or simply couldn’t accept what they could see with their own eyes (Lambert and Saccheri).

    Einstein was an indispensable player but not the only player. Einstein was a genius, but not a lone genius. Einstein never claimed to be and insisted he stood on the shoulders of giants. He gave credit everywhere it was due.

    Not to make a long story too short but Einstein’s 1905 Papers would never have seen the light of day were it not for Max Planck, the leading physicist of his day and a very open minded brilliant man who happened to be a fan of Einstein. People underestimate how long and how hard it was for physics to progress out of Newtonian thinking and into Relativity. Einstein’s ideas took a few years after 1905 to gain broad acceptance.

    Regarding General Relativity, Hilbert got to the field equations first by five days but Einstein had laid down the conceptual framework. This is a long involved story which doesn’t end with Einstein. Skipping ahead, it’s absolutely true that Einstein’s own personal understanding of general relativity is grossly inferior to what hundreds of graduate students learn today. General relativity needed men like Roger Penrose et al to make sense of it. This isn’t simply an icing on the cake sort of issue. There were deep holes (no pun intended) in GR that needed clarification and better understanding. In one of his own unpublished papers Einstein discovered the field equations as early as 1910 but he didn’t recognize the equations as being the correct ones. Right now it can be said that General Relativity is a firmly established complete subject in the same way classical mechanics, statistical mechanics and optics are considered complete. There will be more discoveries related to GR but the “finishing” of the theory really happened in the 50s and 60s during the so called General Relativity Renaissance after Einstein passed away. Einstein like Moses saw the promised land but he never entered it.

    Conclusion. Einstein was a key player and unarguably the most important one in the field of Relativity. He played a key role in the development of quantum mechanics which we haven’t discussed here. Einstein was not alone and many men (and a couple of women) played an indispensable part. Einstein was certainly unusual and not conventional. His mode of thinking would be completely useless today. Einstein was there when we needed him and he supplied the world with a vision for physics which we may or not have been able to come up with on our own without him. I’d give it 50/50 odds. Final ruling Einstein was indispensable to the progress of physics.

    N.B. Mileva Marich most certainly did not discover SR but was undoubtably a much needed support and partner for discussions when Einstein was unknown. He may not have succeeded without her help but the credit for relativity goes 100% to Albert.

    • Agree: BlackDragon
    • Thanks: FB
  143. gay troll says:

    Friendly reminder that Mary Todd Lincoln shot her husband in the head, the actor John Wilkes Booth made a theatrical escape to the Southern border before being conveniently killed, and a show trial for the conspirators was rushed through by the U.S. government in flagrant violation of constitutional protections.

    Never take your eyes off a Vice President.

  144. GeeBee says:
    @Larry Romanoff

    but it is not realistic to challenge the assertion that both world wars were hatched not in Germany but in England, by the Jewish banking dynasties in cooperation with the British Royal Family. There is simply too much supporting evidence.

    Britain – and especially Churchill – undoubtedly played a large part in both starting and then prlonging WWII. Just as Churchill was ‘bought’ by hateful Jews (especially those who formed the group known as ‘The Focus’, notably Sir Bernard Waley-Cohen and others), FDR was also in the hands of his Jewish ‘minders’.

    But the House of Windsor? There is no evidence that they played a part in fomenting war with Germany. There is, however, evidence that they not only did their best to stop it, but that they sympathised with Hitler and National Socialism. I’m in rather a hurry right now, but will write more later if you are interested. In essence, King Edward VIII’s abdication is central to what I am asserting.

    • Replies: @Ann Nonny Mouse
  145. Emily says:
    @Alfred

    Thanks.
    Typo – sorry.
    There wasn’t much ‘God’ in that British action.
    Sorta a preview to the current USA war crimes and Yugoslavia, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Venezuela, etc…..
    Regime change and theft on a vast scale….
    Having already as good as dispossessed the Boers in the Cape itself.
    Their Great Trek of hardship and courage ended a second time in British domination, coercion and takeover.
    The third and final abysmal betrayal by the west, was the ultimate in ignominy.

  146. The American Tragedy is related to greed and was brought about by it. The shylock promised and delivered everytime but the pound of flesh he demanded kept getting bigger and bigger. Now the stage has arrived when the victim will be left with just bones. See Ya!!

  147. Wade says:
    @S

    * A premise of this generally unknown, but, intriguing book, is that the 1776 Revolution had been a planned false split between the US and UK from the very beginning, ie that the Revolutionary War had been ‘thrown’ by the British Empire in favor of the United States.

    That also seems to have been a thesis of Mencius Moldbug, AKA Curtis Yarvin.

  148. @Nick110

    What you say is true, after the Wrights flew, everybody flew, before them there was only talk of flying. And it was news of the Wright accomplishments that generated what was called the rebirth of European aviation. Nobody really flew before them, neither Lilienthal nor Langley nor Whitehead. But all the Wright flights were secret, and it was the Brazilian Santos-Dumont who first flew his 14-bis in public, in Paris, with witnesses. Also, the Wright Flyer did not take off, it was thrown in the air by a catapult, while Santos-Dumont’s plane had wheels, rolled and took off on its own power. So, IMHO, the Brazilians are right, the first man who really flew was Santos-Dumont.

  149. Anon[937] • Disclaimer says:
    @Akindle

    Another attack on white men that includes a Jew. Yes, Edison had a lab of people that harnessed electricity. Is UNZ mad that Edison and Bell were not Jews? So Einstein was a Jew. Is UNZ jealous? Next thing you know UNZ will be declaring that African blacks created everything these men accomplished. Suck it, UNZ.

    Not sure who you’re referring to. But Ron Unz has been honest about the gentile being almost exclusively behind the great inventions and technology.

    “…Sometimes it is much easier to notice obvious patterns in a foreign country than in one’s own. In the early 2000s I read The Master Switch, a widely-praised history of modern communications technology by Columbia University professor Tim Wu, who has subsequently become a leading Internet-rights activist. I found the account fascinating, with so many stories never before known to me. However, I couldn’t help but notice that all the powerful mass-media technologies of our modern world–film, radio, and television–had been invented and pioneered by Gentiles, mostly of Anglo-Saxon origin, but in each case control was seized by ruthless Jewish businessmen, who sometimes destroyed the lives and careers of those creators…”

    American Pravda: Oddities of the Jewish Religion
    RON UNZ • JULY 16, 2018

    https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-oddities-of-the-jewish-religion/

    • Thanks: Ann Nonny Mouse
  150. Einstein = Married Cousins twice²

  151. 131.Curmudgeon says:

    “Thanks for this article. I hope your book(s) cover the US Army theft of the contents of the German Patent Office post WWII.”

    https://www.unz.com/lromanoff/the-greatest-intellectual-property-theft-in-history-operation-paperclip/

    “I have heard, from soldiers, that the contents of a mortally hit tank are like the contents of a blender.”

    Which would include not only the fresh pack of Viagra, but the soldier holding it. 🙂

    .

    120.Joseph Doaks says:

    “Others flew before the Wright Brothers, but none of them understood or had mastered control of aircraft in all three axes of flight”

    Right, so it’s the simplistic “First in Flight” meme which needs debunking — not the talent and inventiveness of the Wright Brothers.

    This is the process known as “moving the goalposts”, an American specialty. It’s a template. China was derided for registering fewer patents than did the US. But then suddenly China registered more patents than the US so the goalposts were moved and now the metric was patents with “international reach” or “number of citations”. So, I still win. In this case, the Wright Brothers were celebrated for more than 100 years for the first powered flight, but then it was finally proven that others flew first so suddenly the metric becomes “talent and inventiveness” and “propeller efficiency” and “3-axis control” and “controlled flight” (by my unique definition). So, I still win.

    .

    129.GeeBee says:

    “(if I might be forgiven for butchering nominative and accusative case pronouns).”

    It made my day to discover there are still humans who can even spell ‘nominative’ and ‘accusative’, much less know what they mean. For this alone, you deserve widespread admiration on this website.

    .

    133.flashlight joe says:

    “Nobody goes to war to do something nice for someone else.”

    Not even Vietnam, Korea, Iraq, Serbia, Jugoslavia, Libya or Syria? If only you could engrave that one thought into the minds of every American.

    .

    138.Wade says:

    “I’d very much like to read an article from you on that subject as well as the Tavistock Institute.”

    I have an article on the Tavistock program to get the US into WWI. I will be sending it to Ron for his consideration in posting. In the meantime, here is a link to a .pdf book on Tavistock. It’s not too well-written and omits important aspects, but it’s available online and contains much good background. The Institute was established and funded by Rothschild and the British Royal Family as a worldwide brainwashing planning center. Bertrand Russell was part of it.

    https://cognitive-liberty.online/wp-content/uploads/Coleman_John_-_The_Tavistock_Institute_of_Human_Relations1.pdf

    And yes, it was Rothschild who offered the atom bomb financing through Einstein. Finding information on Rothschild, on the Group of 300, even on the Dutch and British East India Companies (both Jewish) is exceedingly difficult. Researching this topic requires intense effort because nowhere has santising been carried out to such an extreme as to effect the virtual non-existence of the Rothschild dynasty. All of your comments are on the mark.

    .

    59.FatR says:

    ” . . why is it that every single conspirologist trying to slander Jews always does it in a way that ultimately gives them all the more credit, and leads to inescapable conclusion that they indeed possess superior intelligence and foresight?”

    Perhaps I should read my own article again, but I cannot immediately recall a paragraph where I was “trying to slander Jews”. I was indeed slandering Albert Einstein but I am unclear about exactly how my slandering Einstein while blaming the Jewish media for perpetrating a fraudulent myth “ultimately gives Jews all the more credit”.

    I stated that “Einstein was almost certainly the greatest fraud and plagiarist in modern science, an unashamed intellectual thief”. I am puzzled as to how this “leads to [the] inescapable conclusion that [Jews] indeed possess superior intelligence and foresight”.

    • Replies: @Jmaie
    , @Jmaie
  152. @GeeBee

    So, I shouldn’t invest a lot of money fixing up my mill and the communal oven?

    • Replies: @GeeBee
  153. Saggy says: • Website

    Larry Romanoff -has got to be a phony name. I’m guessing he is a Jew, and everything he writes is at least 50% garbage. And I’ll bet he never addresses the greatest fraud in history, the holohoax. But then, maybe I’m completely wrong.

    • Replies: @annamaria
    , @Reg Cæsar
  154. @Wade

    Yes, MK-ULTRA. Congratulations, sir, you wrote the first shock piece on Unz.com that I simply could not complete. I felt exactly as you describe above. It’s hard to believe that such sadistic people can find sanction in the highest levels of our intelligence agencies.

    Is it any accident that the biggest paedophile rings are found near the centres of power behind these schemes?

  155. Culpepper says:
    @Larry Romanoff

    I find this very interesting.
    With regard to the enslavement of Chinese coolies you write:

    Only one Canadian historical website makes any reference to this

    Pleae provide a reference

  156. @Priss Factor

    Nobody doubts what you say but what’s special about America is their enforcement of the copyright and arm twisting. During Edison’s time copywriting every little idea was a craze.

  157. Interesting that there isn’t a single video about Bautista Aparici on Youtube.

    • Replies: @annamaria
  158. Culpepper says:
    @Emily

    Yes the second Boer war is a blot on our history, not least because for every enemy combatant that died four civilians did also. I have often wondered what the combatant/civilian casualty ratio was at the hands of the British in the last German war.

  159. Vojkan says:
    @Morton's toes

    Do a read about the works of Ole Rømer, Hermann Minkowski (who happened to be Jewish), James Maxwell, Hendrik Lorentz, Henri Poincaré and Pavel Cherenkov about the measurement of the speed of light, its nature and whether anything can or cannot travel faster than light. Einstein’s work is as original and groundbreaking as an album of covers by a talent show contestant.

    • Replies: @Morton's toes
  160. 149.gay troll says:

    “Friendly reminder that Mary Todd Lincoln shot her husband in the head, the actor John Wilkes Booth made a theatrical escape to the Southern border before being conveniently killed . . .”

    The history of Abraham Lincoln is yet another American Disneyland historical myth.

    This isn’t widely-known, but Mary Todd Lincoln was an inveterate opium addict and her supplier was a Jewish drug dealer named John Wilkes Booth who, from his relationship with Mary Todd, had unlimited and unrestricted access to the White House. It is also recorded by his granddaughter in a book titled “This One Mad Act” that Booth had been in frequent contact with some “mysterious Europeans” immediately prior to the death of Lincoln. It is also recorded that Booth, because of his access to the White House and the President, had offered his services to those same ‘mysterious Europeans’ as an intermediary. I’m guessing the topic would have been persuading Lincoln to abandon his plan to kill the Rothschild-owned FED as he vowed to do the moment he took office. And, failing that, to kill Lincoln.

    The thesis that Mary Todd killed her husband contains a surprising amount of circumstantial credibility. Mary Todd had just discovered that her best friend had had two children fathered by Abraham. Another point is that Mary Todd refused to attend her husband’s funeral, a circumstance attributed to ‘shock and grief’ or some such, but the explanations truly lacked the ring of truth. This sound like a batty conspiracy theory but, when we assemble all the small details, the thesis fits all the facts perfectly.

    It also isn’t widely-known that the history of Abraham Lincoln is another Disney fairytale. Lincoln was the illegitimate son of a young woman named Nancy Hanks who was either seduced or forcibly taken by a Jewish slave-owner named Abraham Enloe. But the man did the right thing when the girl didn’t want the child, and put him up for adoption with a family named Lincoln – after giving the infant his first name. Did you ever wonder why Lincoln was named ‘Abraham’? Now, you know.

    This latter information arose from the discovery of the man’s will not very long ago, and that document related all the relevant details as well as specifying financial provisions for the child’s care. The documents are available online. I haven’t time to search my computer for the links.

    • Agree: kerdasi amaq
  161. Anon[440] • Disclaimer says:
    @Emily

    My great-grandmother was born in a Boer concentration camp. Therefore I would rightly have a claim against the British Crown, and against the mostly jewish commissioners who administered the camps. To this day the Queen refuses to acknowledge the crime, let alone offer compensation. The Boer wars permanently crippled the Afrikaners

    • Agree: Emily
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  162. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Jiminy

    I believe the same can apply to Darwin’s theory of evolution as well. There was a man by the name of Wallace who did a lot of investigative work on wildlife in the Indonesian islands, and developed a written theory that he then sent off to Darwin. The rest is history.

    Drivel.

    The theory of evolution goes back to the Greeks. Neither Darwin nor Wallace invented it. Darwin’s contribution was that of a great naturalist who was extremely well informed about geology and who gathered the palaeontological evidence that made the theory of evolution indisputable.

    • Agree: mikemikev, annamaria
  163. Mefobills says:
    @dearieme

    Ben Franklin from his auto-biography. He gives credit where credit is due. Franklin was not an a-hole.
    ________________

    In 1746, being at Boston, I met there with a Dr. Spence, who was lately arrived from Scotland,and show’d me some electric experiments. They were imperfectly perform’d, as he was not very expert; but, being on a subject quite new to me, they equally surpris’d and pleased me. Soon after my return to Philadelphia, our library company receiv’d from Mr. P. Collinson, Fellow of the Royal Society of London, a present of a glass tube, with some account of the use of it in makingsuch experiments. I eagerly seized the opportunity of repeating what I had seen at Boston; and, by much practice, acquir’d great readiness in performing those, also, which we had an account of from England, adding a number of new ones. I say much practice, for my house was continually full, for some time, with people who came to see these new wonders. To divide a little this incumbrance among my friends, I caused a number of similar tubes to be blown at our glass-house, with which they furnish’d themselves, so that we had at length several performers. Among these, the principal was Mr. Kinnersley, an ingenious neighbor, who, being out of business, I encouraged to undertake showing the experiments for money, and drew up for him two lectures, in which the experiments were rang’d in such order, and accompanied with such explanations in such method, as that the foregoing should assist in comprehending the following. He procur’d an elegant apparatus for the purpose, in which all the little machines that I had roughly made for myself were nicely form’d by instrument-makers. His lectures were well attended, and gave great satisfaction; and after some time he went thro’ the colonies, exhibiting them in every capital town, and pick’d up some money. In the West India islands, indeed, it was with difficulty the experiments could be made, from the general moisture of the air.

    ____________

    The American Revolution is something to be proud of. It was a revolution against predatory “aristocratic” creditors.

    These creditors had in mind a laboring class of “hindoooo, negroe, and indentured” white labor worldwide. The creditors would have owned all of the land through enclosure, a project already successfully piloted in England.

    Behind these creditors were jewish stock owners and creditors in Bank of England.

    The American System of Economy of John Winthrop, Cotton Mather, Benjamin Franklin, Washington, Hamilton, John Quincy Adams, Matthew Carey, Henry Carey was a liberation from the “class” system that threatened to envelop the world.

    Civil war was a re-run, where the lands of America were to be returned to the Colonial System, and free labor impressed.

    The “one per-centers” of that day, were against the american revolution. The real history of the U.S. has been erased, and now it is being replaced by America = evil

    Whatever you do, don’t look up at who your real enemies are.

  164. annamaria says:
    @TGD

    Are you still on Blue Pill?

  165. @Chris Moore

    “done to advance the “Persecuted” half of their Chosen/Persecuted shtick.”

    Quite right.

    To the exact degree that one of them plays the persecuted shtick, to that exact degree, they will give themselves license to persecute.

    That’s Taoism, Karma, Hegel, Freud (for whom masochism and sadism were opposite sides of the same coin)–whatever someone wants to call it.

    So, you can bet that when you hear a Jew talk of his or her sufferings, the very next sentence out of his/her mouth will be how you deserve to suffer for having caused their suffering; how their causing you to suffer is “justice”, a balancing of the books. You need not respond to their mistreatment of you, because now the score is settled, the scales are in perfect balance.

  166. Hibernian says:
    @Fidelios Automata

    OK for an inventor/engineer/industrialist such as Edison, but Einstein presented himself as a theoretical physicist and this ppredated the War by quite a few years.

  167. GeeBee says:
    @The Alarmist

    Your reply reminds me that a sense of humour – and the laughter it brings – are a salutary response to the ills that beset us all. Thanks for that reminder of this fundamental truth.

    • Thanks: The Alarmist
  168. annamaria says:
    @Saggy

    Please, Saggy, address the greatest fraud in history. Why didn’t you address it already?

    • Replies: @Saggy
  169. Hibernian says:
    @Rick Derris

    I’ve heard that the Patent Office has a loose view of what constitutes a patentable invention; many are not even just based on prior art but are incremental improvements to it and nothing to write home about. Of course, if you blatantly steal somebody else’s work that they didn’t patent, you may get away with it. Also, established firms that can afford good lawyers have an advantage.

  170. Dannyboy says:

    Yo Larry! Are you a Jew?

    You live in Shanghai, but your name sounds suspiciously made up, like most Jew names.

    I notice you didn’t specifically address the Moon Landing “Hoax” that the one retard included in his post.

    When are the Jewish or Chinese Supermen gonna be able to duplicate what White American boys did FIFTY FUCKIN’ YEARS AGO, dipshit?

    • Replies: @Iris
    , @Emily
  171. annamaria says:
    @Priss Factor

    Coca-Cola came out as a thieving company: https://www.eyeonspain.com/blogs/iwonderwhy/19959/spains-claim-to-coca-cola.aspx

    The history of Aielo’s Fábrica de Licores dates back to 1880. … Aparici, who was in charge of sales, was soon travelling from the Spanish province to trade fairs in Rome, Paris, London and Chicago. In 1885 he went to Philadelphia with a new beverage in his luggage. Called Kola Coca, it was made from the caffeine-rich fruit of African kola nut trees and the leaves of Peruvian coca plants, and promptly scooped an innovation prize. Before he left, Aparici gave some American sales representatives a few samples. … one year later, US pharmacist John Pemberton made history when he invented Coca-Cola.

    Kola Coca won the company awards in Milan in 1881, in Chicago in 1883, in Philadelphia in 1885, in London in 1889 and in Paris in 1900. They were certainly onto something big… A total of 20 gold medals and 10 honorary diplomas were won by their Kola Coca drink.

  172. Hibernian says:
    @Boldizar

    In the field where it happened.

  173. Thomasina says:
    @Emily

    One of my relatives died there, fighting for the British nation against the Boers. Was with the Black Watch from Scotland, 17 years old, I believe, too young to know what he was doing, and no doubt lied to about what they were fighting for. They were all sitting ducks coming across the field that night. Just a memory that got passed down through the generations.

    What the British did to the Boers in South Africa was unconscionable. Absolutely disgusting and, as you say, all for diamonds and gold.

    The lies we have been told! What, do they just mix in “some” truth with the lies and call it a day?

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
  174. Dannyboy says:

    but, as one historian noted, “the Wrights stole both the concept and the actual design from an Australian who had recorded it years before, and who had himself deduced the concept from the boomerang of the Australian aboriginals.” The Wright Brothers stole the idea to build their aircraft, then patented it and sued others for using it.

    “As one historian noted”… Niggas built da pyramids n’ shit.

    It’s about as tough to get “historians” to become revisionists as it is to get “scientists” to become politically correct automatons. You dangle large sums in front of them, and.. Viola’… you generally get the desired results.

  175. Jmaie says:
    @Larry Romanoff

    I was indeed slandering Albert Einstein but I am unclear about exactly how my slandering Einstein while blaming the Jewish media for perpetrating a fraudulent myth “ultimately gives Jews all the more credit”.

    By definition the truth cannot be slander.

  176. @Larry Romanoff

    “Most people in a society – Americans certainly included – if left to their own devices, behave normally. They are rational, can be imaginative and creative, generally get along with each other, and build a human and well-functioning society.”

    You better watch it. Statements of fact like this gonna get you in big trouble with the niggerniggerniggerers.

  177. 162.Culpepper says:

    “With regard to the enslavement of Chinese coolies you write: Only one Canadian historical website makes any reference to this. Please provide a reference.”

    “The difficulty in obtaining an adequate work force . . . led to the controversial importation of thousands of Chinese workers.”

    https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/canadian-pacific-railway

    • Replies: @Culpepper
    , @CBTerry
  178. @ploni almoni

    I got curious. I never heard anything about it.

    • Replies: @ploni almoni
  179. @Curmudgeon

    Interesting. Would there be any more “advanced” material?

    • Replies: @Curmudgeon
  180. BrilloPad says:

    I came to this article wanting unbiased information about falsified history, but instead I got something you would likely find in a tabloid rag, if the writing were actually good enough for that.

    I approached the article with a truly honest attempt to lay aside any biases I may have, and got about halfway through it and realized this author is about as intellectually dishonest as anyone I’ve ever read trying to “expose” the fallacies of history.  Everything (that I’ve read so far) is simply a re-hash of things most people already knew about Einstein — except — he left out a lot of context and collateral information that would explain Einstein’s reasoning and purposes.

    For example: It is a well known fact that extremely complex mathematics was not one of Einstein’s greatest strengths.  He often approached people like John Von Neumann (a certified mathematical genius), and others — including his wife — to check his math or to get help with formulations he needed in order to prove a theory.  His wife, Maleva Meric, was also a physicist but never completed her doctorate, and often did check her husband’s math, at his request. There was never any controversy about this, and it has been mentioned in nearly every biographical book about Einstein, and in many articles.

    I could go down the list of Romanoff’s specious claims, adding historical context to reveal the true dishonesty in his writing, but when from the outset he starts assembling “facts” much as the National Enquirer does, it just seems to be all downhill from there, and rather much a waste of time.

    Einstein did a lot of gathering of current and past scientific theories that could not be proven by themselves without concomitant hypotheses that would support them; bringing them together into a cohesive whole that showed how they worked perfectly together.  He melded a lot of scientific and mathematical data from many other scientists, like Faraday, Plank, Maxwell and others. 

    Also Romanoff fails to mention that plagiarism is an early to mid-twentieth century literary standard.  Back when Einstein published his theories, there was little constraint against borrowing from uncited sources.  Otherwise the list of historical contributors, from the scientists of ancient Greece back to the Babylonian Empire, forward to Newton and whomever, would have been orders of magnitude greater than the text itself.

    Max Plank was the foremost physicist of his time.  In those days almost everyone read scientific journals because so many new theories and discoveries were being made.  Plank enjoyed, in his time, what is a commonly used metaphor today — rock-star status.  He was a certifiable super-genius and undisputed leader in the relatively new science of physics (theoretical and experimental).  He read and absorbed virtually everything in the realm of current and historical science.  Yet, after receiving a copy of Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity, while Al was still working at the patent office, Plank had no reservations about approaching Einstein concerning his work; a condescension much like the Pope petitioning a low-ranking Muslim cleric to explain Scripture to him, and asking Einstein to join his institute of advance theoretical physics.  Einstein immediately walked out of the patent office without so much as a formal resignation. 

    Plank didn’t give a rats-ass about how much theory Einstein may have drawn from other scientists; he recognized a scientific visionary when he saw one.  And to say that Plank didn’t know about ancillary theories from other scientists that Einstein had incorporated into his work, would be somewhat like claiming Newton’s Principia Mathematica doesn’t assimilate the mathematics of his scientific ancestors. Yet we don’t usually tag Newton with the epithet of “plagiarist.”

    One thing in which Romanoff was undoubtedly correct was his assessment that Einstein was a “third-class” patent clerk (except “third-class” is likely his own pejorative wording to further bias his readers).  To Einstein it was just merely a job to pay the bills, while his love was theoretical physics.  He was often reprimanded by his superiors at the patent office for being lazy and inattentive to his work because it bored him so much.

    It has frequently been observed that one of Einstein’s greatest talents was his genius for bringing together seemingly disparate theories that, on the surface, appeared to be inharmonious, and mathematically prove how they worked perfectly with each other (no matter whose help he had to lean on to prove his theores); something the originators could not do.

    This guy’s article, to me, has the same flavor (or odor) of the people who wrote extensively about the moon landings having been faked (they still haven’t explained the high-res photograph’s taken by the Chinese lunar orbiter that show the Apollo landing sites in such detail as to reveal the trails left by the astronaut’s feet and rovers). The only difference was not in the spirit of dishonesty (they are the same in that), but in that Romanoff used well-known factual history, presenting it in such a way as to make it appear revelatory and new, when in truth they are all (as far as I’ve read his article) simple extractions placed out of their historical context.  To me, it is somewhat like reading the Bible where it says a woman was caught in the act of adultery, and then connecting it with the text that says “go thou and do likewise;” totally separated from any correlation with the reality of historical fact and context.

    Also, referring to the letter from Einstein to Roosevelt, which Romanoff presents as evidence of Einstein’s less-than-authentic claims as a pseudo-pacifist, encouraging the president to pursue a nuclear weapon: Einstein later declared that was the biggest mistake of his life. And — it was actually Leo Szillard who composed and typed the letter, and then persuaded Einstein to sign it.

    What initially tipped me off to the questionable intent of the author’s writing was all the pejorative and defamatory adjectives and phrases he used at the beginning of his article, before presenting any “proofs” to support his thesis. You don’t spend that much time (or any time) at the outset shooting off your mouth about how pernicious and fake someone’s life’s work was, before getting to whatever proofs you may have — unless you have your own agenda for manipulating history.  He writes almost a full page of his opinionated rant before getting around to any external corroboration. That has only one purpose; to bias and prejudice the reader towards the author’s hypothesis. 

    Sorry, but I do not intend to finish reading Romanoff’s unsubstantiated screed, since there is so much mental prevarication in what I’ve read so far, it would simply be a waste of time.

    • Replies: @Iris
    , @BlackDragon
  181. @Vojkan

    That’s Einstein in the center of the front row of a meeting of the world’s leading physicists. Just how many of these guys do you claim are frauds?

    • Replies: @Vojkan
    , @annamaria
  182. Jmaie says:
    @Larry Romanoff

    Right, so it’s the simplistic “First in Flight” meme which needs debunking — not the talent and inventiveness of the Wright Brothers.

    This is the process known as “moving the goalposts”, an American specialty. It’s a template.

    This is a bit ridiculous. The previous flights occurred on vehicles which were poorly controlled, tended to crash and often killed the pilot. The Wright brothers were the first** to produce a plane capable of sustained controlled flight. It is pure pedantry to argue that just because someone else got something off the ground earlier they deserve the credit as first. By that logic Homer was actually flying when he jumped the Springfield gorge on Bart’s skateboard.

    *Making no judgement on whether the New Zealand flight(s) should count as first…

  183. @Roberto Gentilli

    Wrong on every point. The 14-bis could not turn, so it was not a real aeroplane. When it made its first 20 second “flight” of a mere 160 feet in a straight line at an altitude so low it would hit a man standing in its path, the Wright’s a YEAR PREVIOUS had made a 40 minute flight of 24 miles in a circling flight plan. The Wright Flyers took off under its own power, no catapult was used. Compare the Wright Flyer with the Santos-Dumont 14-bis. The Wright Flyer has the clean simple lines of a winning design, the Santos-Dumont 14-bis looks like an absurd contraption made for a comedy routine. If the thing can’t turn and maneuvor in flight, it is not an aeroplane, it is a joke on a very short flight to a fatal crash.

  184. Tadeo says:

    I wanted to believe this guy ‘cause the article is well written & kinda plausible. I knew about Meucci and the Coca Cola story cause I live in Spain. But then I read he defends Venezuela’s narco Government, along with China’s and other rogue States?, so I can state without a doubt he’s full of s…
    This article is full of half-truths and outright lies, written for self-hating americans that want to destroy their own country

    • Agree: Gleimhart Mantooso
  185. anon[191] • Disclaimer says:

    Everything said above is all going to be a moot point in the future whether Bell invented the telephone or it was it the Italian guy. Children in the future will be told that everything that made our lives better was invented in Africa and stolen from the natives by the white man. There were extensive telephone networks in Wakanda before colonial times. The only credit that will be given to the white man will be the invention of destructive devices like the Atomic bomb. Nuclear energy was invented by genius Albert Einstein for peaceful purposes but stolen from him by horrible right-wing nazi scientists backed by the US government and turned into the Atomic bomb which was intended to enslave the world and push back Zionist plans to feed the entire world and make it a paradise where nobody has any wants or needs.

  186. Jmaie says:
    @Larry Romanoff

    This latter information arose from the discovery of the man’s will not very long ago, and that document related all the relevant details as well as specifying financial provisions for the child’s care. The documents are available online. I haven’t time to search my computer for the links.

    Please find the time, Uncle Google seems to find no reference to a will (everything I found says he died intestate) nor anything about an adoption. Dropping spectacular claims and then advising readers to look for the links themselves does not improve your credibility.

    And are you seriously ascribing Jewish influence to anyone named Abraham?

  187. dearieme says:
    @Mefobills

    All very jolly, but did he do his kite-and-key-and-lightning experiment? You’ve not quoted his claim to that.

    I gather than those who’ve tried to repeat it report that it doesn’t work which is, apparently, just as well because if it had worked it would have killed him – or whoever he had holding the string.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  188. MarkinLA says:
    @Larry Romanoff

    For example, everyone knows that millions of Chinese came to North America (Canada and the US) to help build the railroads, and later to work the gold mines.

    Millions? Really, Id, like to see some proof. A few tens of thousands to build the transcontinental railroad, maybe. Millions, in an era of where there were still wooden ships – NO.

    Lets see some proof.

    • Replies: @BrilloPad
  189. dearieme says:
    @Just another serf

    My father saw Belsen, you prick.

  190. @onebornfree

    “Also, the films of the nuclear tests, regardless of country, all appear to be wholly fraudulent, made in studio creations.”

    The USSR Tsar bomb was fraudulent?

    • Replies: @Ultrafart the Brave
  191. dearieme says:
    @mikemikev

    Dear God, more of it.

    • Replies: @syonredux
  192. annamaria says:
    @FatR

    “…leads to inescapable conclusion that they indeed possess superior intelligence and foresight?”

    — Like the superior intelligence and foresight of American ziocons? Or like the revealing of ethical and intellectual weakness of certain important plagiarizer (A. E.) who was afraid to enter into a discussion about his thievery? Before showing your righteous indignation, learn some basic physics to familiarise yourself with Lorenz transforms and beautiful works by Poincare: https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/esp_einstein.htm

    Your strange conclusion of supposedly superior “intelligence and foresight” is very much escapable. Take a quick look at certain Douglas Feith (very Jewish) who was justly called “the f–king stupidest guy on the face of the earth.” https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2004/05/douglas-feith-undersecretary-of-defense-for-fiascos.html
    What about Elie Wiesel, a major falsifier and ‘holobiz survivor?’ Or Ben Cardin, an amoral supporter and promoter of the mega-thief Bill Browder? In the same impressive group are Meyer Lansky, Bronfmans, Lex Wexner, Epstein, Bob Maxwell, and Ghislaine a Procuress.
    Perhaps you meant that the above bunch of Jewish people is special by their special kind of criminality: no shame, no scruples, ethnic arrogance, and absolute loyalty to Israel for the expense of their country of residence. But it is hard to find both “intelligence and foresight” in their activities. https://www.mintpressnews.com/shocking-origins-jeffrey-epstein-blackmail-roy-cohn/260621/

    The same is true about A. E. He was not an honest person.

    • Replies: @Ann Nonny Mouse
  193. anonimo11 says:
    @gay troll

    Perhaps you meant “astronomy”.

  194. Vojkan says:
    @Morton's toes

    Whether they are or aren’t frauds is irrelevant. You infer that because he sit at the center of the front row, they considered him as the biggest genius among them. Maybe they did, maybe they didn’t. It is irrelevant. The discussion isn’t about what they thought, the discussion is about what Einstein truly achieved on his own. Read about the work of the scientists I’ve listed.

  195. Lol… BAD AMERICA… BAD BAD. Welcome to lawyer Town!

  196. anonimo11 says:
    @gay troll

    It is right there in the thread Hiram points to. With Huygens formula and Kepler’s third law, any high schooler can derive it for circular orbits.

    • Thanks: Hiram of Tyre
    • Replies: @Zarathustra
  197. @Larry Romanoff

    Now I get it.

    You’re making all of this up as you go along, aren’t you?

    • Agree: Wizard of Oz
  198. Iris says:
    @Dannyboy

    When are the Jewish or Chinese Supermen gonna be able to duplicate what White American boys did FIFTY FUCKIN’ YEARS AGO, dipshit?

    If they had really sent manned vessels to the Moon, American space engineers themselves would be able to replicate this alleged exploit; we would not have to wait for Russians and Chinese to do so.

    The Moon Hoax is the most ludicrous of all official lies, but at least, it is funny and benign.

    • Agree: kerdasi amaq, Robjil
    • Replies: @Anon
    , @Anon
    , @AKindle
  199. @Mefobills

    The Founding fathers considered anyone who wasn’t Anglo Saxon and high born:

    “Black”

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  200. Rdm says:
    @Larry Romanoff

    The result is that under this multi-pronged oppression people lose their ability to think. And when George Bush tells 1,000 obvious lies about why an innocent country like Iraq should be destroyed, the people cannot see and they acquiesce. They know the lies are lies but can no longer think rationally enough to put the pieces together.

    This hit home.

    I’m wondering why there are lots of Karen suddenly appearing in this pandemic. No wonder we have cultivated a culture of idiocy over half a century.

    • Agree: Sya Beerens, annamaria
  201. @Larry Romanoff

    There was no Rothschild owned FED in 1865. However, there was the greenback, interest free treasury notes used as currency, which “Honest” Abe was going to use to rebuild the South after, first, wrecking it. European bankers did not approve of that.

  202. Rdm says:
    @Priss Factor

    What you said is true. But the analogy you used was wrong. 

    Steve Jobs was considered as a trendsetter. He can concoct all the available technological amenities and make it as one. But he’s not an inventor or genius in a sense that he has technological prowess or skills. 

    For Einstein, he was considered a true sole philosopher as well as a true physicist that outshine every scientist that you can imagine. That’s where it fails to indicate that someone who concocted all the idea together, made it as his own and claimed as he’s a true scientist is unfortunately misleading the next generation of aspiring young scientists.

    Similarly, we can also see that if someone claims Mark Zuckerberg is a true genius, transformed how people interact, revolutionized the way social interaction behave, it’d be absurd, don’t you think? 

    There were MySpace, Friendster, Hi5 all the social media platforms available well before Facebook came into live. It was, at least you can say, Jews media pushing hard for a platform that was concocted by a young Jewish boy. 

    • Replies: @Kapyong
  203. Interesting stuff about Einstein. You could add to this Einstein’s attempt to explain the “twins paradox” via the special theory (i.e., without gravity or acceleration) which is discussed in some detail by Louis Essen, known for creating the first atomic clock,

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Essen
    https://web.archive.org/web/20121010131916/http://www.btinternet.com/~time.lord/
    http://www.naturalphilosophy.org/pdf/abstracts/abstracts_207.pdf

    Essen’s criticism of Einstein received the same sort of reception your physicist contacts warned you about.

  204. Polymath says:
    @Anon

    The residents of St. Augustine, FL, would like a word….

  205. Anon[535] • Disclaimer says:
    @Iris

    LOL…Thank you for stoppin’ by’ darlin.

    You do more for your “cause” in one comment, than I could do in six lifetimes.

  206. Emily says:
    @Dannyboy

    When are the Jewish or Chinese Supermen gonna be able to duplicate what White American boys did FIFTY FUCKIN’ YEARS AGO, dipshit?

    I trust you are being sarcastic!
    When are the White American boys going to repeat the feat they claimed to have achieved 50 years ago?
    Well they can’t can they?
    They never went – it was a total scam not least thanks to Kubrick.
    They can’t duplicate it now – so they claim they have lost the ‘instruction book’.
    The fact is technology today would pick up the hoax before they got a quarter of the way.
    LOL
    Good grief – they have to buy Russian ‘tickets’ to get to the space station….

    • Replies: @Malla
  207. profnasty says:
    @Realist

    Now really.
    When Edison killed the elephant, ivory was USs plastic. We undoubtedly killed tens of thousands of elephants in that era. AND US used SLAVE LABOR to carry tusks out of central Africa, into the 1950s.
    US slavery survived into my lifetime.
    Elephant? Hahahaha hahahaha 😂!

    • Replies: @Realist
  208. @gay troll

    From whom did Newton steal the law of universal gravitation?

    A combination of Huygens and Kepler.

    Forgive me for not rewriting the argument here, it’s lengthy. I discussed the matter in another article here on Unz – starting with comment no.136:

    https://www.unz.com/ishamir/coronavirus-conspiracies/#new_comments

    Astrology is the mother of all science, civilization, and religion. Study of the sun and stars was prerequisite to the dawn of agriculture. Some scientific theses stand up to investigation, and some do not. But knowledge is gained through observation, trial and error. Alchemy has been rejected as a physical thesis, but only through the experimentation of alchemists was it concluded to be impossible. One should also countenance the notion that alchemy is truly about spiritual, not physical refinement and transmutation. The philosopher’s stone is the treasure of he who loves knowledge. And with it can be exposed the richness of the most basic material.

    Did you mean Astronomy?

  209. Realist says:
    @annamaria

    How is your comment pertinent to mine???

    • Replies: @annamaria
  210. @mark green

    “He alone figured out How the Universe Works.” Rubbish. He never knew or figured out this. In fact no one knows the whole Universe. The so called Big Bang theory of which was based from the Friedman model, of which Einstein worked on one with De Sitter, is the Big ‘BS’ model. Remember in that day observational cosmology was very thin. Now its the Lamba CDM big ‘BS’ model that is finally falling apart. I daresay the BB lovers will reply in force, bring it on.

    • Replies: @mark green
  211. Iris says:
    @BrilloPad

    Max Plank was the foremost physicist of his time.

    The physicust name was Planck, not Plank, something yoy would know if you had studied basic physics as Planck’s Constant is taught in high schools.

    About Einstein’s Relativity article, physicist Max Born (Nobel Prize 1954) stated:
    “The striking point is that it contains not a single reference to previous literature” (Born, 1956).

    He was clearly indicating that the absence of references is abnormal and that, even by early 20th century standards, this is most peculiar, even unprofessional.

    Plank had no reservations about approaching Einstein concerning his work

    Max Planck was probably not aware that the “E = mc2” formula had been formally published by Italian scientist Olinto De Pretto in 1904, a year and a half before Einstein’s article.
    Einstein was fluent in Italian, was reviewing papers written by Italian physicists and his best friend was Michele Besso, a Swiss Italian. Clearly, Einstein would have had in 1905 access to that literature and the competence to read it.

    • Thanks: annamaria
  212. profnasty says:
    @Emily

    Pales in comparison to your utter destruction of White Germany. Britain be damned.

  213. Realist says:
    @profnasty

    When Edison killed the elephant, ivory was USs plastic. We undoubtedly killed tens of thousands of elephants in that era.

    I am quite aware of the past uses of ivory and I do not excuse the slaughter of elephants for ivory…but at least there was a part of the elephant used.

    What made Edison a particular immoral asshole was his cruel, unnecessary electrocution of an elephant.

    SLAVE LABOR? Hahahaha hahahaha 😂!

  214. @Thomasina

    The lies we have been told! What, do they just mix in “some” truth with the lies and call it a day?

    Boer Wars made the career of a young Winston Churchill … I guess you need say no more.

    • Agree: Crazy Horse
    • Replies: @Thomasina
  215. @BlackDragon

    “He alone figured out How the Universe Works.” Rubbish.

    You clearly did not read my entire comment. In fact, I was not positing that view about Einstein in any way. I was merely noting that the ‘sole genius’ view of Einstein has been merchandised widely and has become, unfortunately, broadly accepted. A closer examination proves otherwise.

    • Replies: @BlackDragon
  216. Saggy says: • Website
    @annamaria

    Why didn’t you address it already?

    Exposing the holohoax is why I’m here. And, this is one of the few sites other than StormFront where the hoax can be exposed. To acquaint yourself with my approach visit holohoax101.org , or bitchute.com/rumpelstiltskin/

    • Replies: @GeeBee
    , @Wizard of Oz
  217. anonimo11 says:
    @Iris

    Although I have seen the derivation by De Pretto, and I don’t think it is correct.

    • Replies: @Iris
  218. anonimo11 says:
    @Anon

    Scenes shot by Kubrick in an Arizona warehouse, debunked in multiple ways, and used for national identity building by a bunch of idiots.

  219. mc86 says:
    @Boldizar

    The Cherry tree was hit by lighting. Nobody let small kids play with axes in those days.

  220. Iris says:
    @Anon

    Sure, this is “you” on Stanley Kubrick’ film stage all right; nice work of art.

    Did you notice that the Moon’s soil (regolith), filmed in natural colours, appears dark-orange on China’s recent Moon landing pictures, a fact that the Russians predicted back in the 1960’s thanks to their advance in spectroscopy, but NASA wasn’t aware of?

    How come all the Apollo “landing” photos show the Moon soil to be grey? Did the Apollo missions, by extraordinary chance, land 6 times in exceptional, rare grey spots at the surface of the Moon?

    [MORE]

    • Disagree: AKindle
    • Replies: @Joe Stalin
    , @AKindle
    , @Tadeo
  221. Thomasina says:
    @The Alarmist

    Everything he touched seemed to turn to sh*t, didn’t it? He caused so many deaths.

    • Agree: Iris, The Alarmist
  222. @anonimo11

    There is no circular orbit of the planets. Only elliptical

    • Replies: @anonimo11
  223. FB says: • Website
    @A Competent Physicist

    Thanks for some sound information…Einstein did indeed put a lot of things together which already were brought forth by investigators like Lorentz and Poincare…that is how scientific advancement works…this ‘article’ is complete nonsense on the Einstein issue…

    Now here are my thoughts on the Wright Brothers…let’s first keep to historical facts and figures that some people may not be aware of…

    That ‘first flight’ in 1903 was really more of a hop…covering a total of just 120 feet, about the wingspan of the Boeing 737, itself a smallish airplane…

    It was not until several years later that the Wrights were able to demonstrate what one would consider real flight…ie staying aloft and flying around, much as a bird might do…

    Quite a bit of time elapsed between that first hop and that kind of sustained, real flight…In the meantime, others did in fact demonstrate that kind of real, sustained flight lasting minutes instead of mere seconds, and covering distances measured in miles instead of feet, while reaching heights one would expect for birds instead of insects…

    The Wrights did do some real aeronautical work and advanced the state of the art in some areas…they built small wind tunnels and conducted aerodynamic experiments…the propellers they devised were quite aerodynamically good, even compared to modern propellers…and the engine developed by their collaborator Charlie Taylor was perhaps the single most important item on that first aircraft…

    But like Einstein, many others had done a lot of work that laid foundation stones, such as the German glider pioneer Otto Lillienthal, a trained engineer and one of the major contributors to the understanding of aeronautics as an engineering discipline…

    Many others worked concurrently and made many huge advances…in 1909, just a mere six years after the Wrights had made that wind-assisted hop of about 100 feet, the French aviator Louis Bleriot flew across the English Channel in his Type XI monoplane…

    Demonstrating not only the aircraft configuration that would become predominant to the present day…single wing, aft tail…but proving that the idea of powered flight was a practical concept…in fact making it a reality…

    Orville Wright was in Europe at the time of Bleriot’s famed flight and wrote to brother Wilbur, urging him to enter the contest and huge prize offered by the London Daily Mail newspaper…but Orville himself was injured with broken limbs in a crash that had killed his passenger, 26-year-old Lieutenant Thomas Selfridge, the first air passenger fatality…

    The Wright Flyer III in Kill Devil Hills North Carolina, 1908…the aircraft uses a biplane configuration with the pitch control in front, instead of a tailplane in the back…which has come to be called the sparsely employed ‘foreplane’ or ‘canard’ configuration in modern use…

    In 1908, Orville flew with mechanic Charles Furnas to a distance of about 2,000 ft, which is about one third of a mile…one year later Bleriot flew across the Channel which is a distance of more than 20 miles…

    To say the Wright Brothers invented the airplane is simply ridiculous…but that is what many go-go types would like to have the world believe…

    Still this ‘author’ manages to bungle up nearly everything he writes about, even when he is basically on the right path as with Edison and even the Wrights…the brouhaha with the Smithsonian was actually that they had for many years denied the Wrights any credit, pushing instead their own man, onetime Smithsonian Secretary Samuel Langley, a trained scientist who nonetheless flopped quite badly in his well funded attempts to achieve powered flight…

  224. Crazy Horse says: • Website

    Yeah and the Toilet Paper of Record the NYT added diarrhea icing to a big steaming pile of BS with their 1619 Project. Eric Blair must not only be spinning but doing cartwheels and pirouettes in his grave right now.

    The Einstein being a man of peace myth was blown up the day they dropped the bomb on Hiroshima.

    BTW Bell and Edison were not only total frauds but big fans of Eugenics.

    That said I don’t support these mental midgets from KKKFa and Big Lies Matter tearing down statuary and memorials. That’s just crude criminal vandalism and I believe these morons should be convicted of criminal stupidity to the fullest extent of the law.

    Anyway we have a lot to learn about our actual history and maybe this is the silver lining in all of this.

  225. @Saggy

    I’m guessing he is a Jew, and everything he writes is at least 50% garbage. And I’ll bet he never addresses the greatest fraud in history…

    You mean their support of the legal teaching of evolution in the schools? Real Americans fought that for decades, but lost.

    https://www.aclu.org/issues/religious-liberty/religion-and-public-schools/creationism-evolution-and-religion

    https://www.aclu.org/other/aclu-history-scopes-monkey-trial

    https://www.aclu.org/other/what-scientific-community-says-about-evolution-and-intelligent-design

    Opponents predicted that allowing Darwinists access to schoolchildren would start a long slide into amorality and decadence. That was one of the more accurate predictions of the 20th century. If this wasn’t a Jewish conspiracy to weaken civilization, what is?

    • Replies: @Saggy
  226. Iris says:
    @anonimo11

    Olinto De Pretto, an industrialist from Vicenza, published the equation E=mc2 in a scientific magazine called Atte in 1903.

    It was republished in 1904 by Veneto’s Royal Science Institute, but the equation’s significance was not understood.

    A Swiss Italian named Michele Besso alerted Einstein to the research and in 1905 Einstein published his own work, without credit to De Pretto, hence attributing the formula to himself.

    This story of intellectual theft was documented in a book by Professor Bartocci, a mathematical historian of the University of Perugia. Never translated to English, God forbid, lol.

    • Replies: @anonimo11
  227. Petermx says:

    I can believe that Einstein was overrated, that the Jewish media promoted him as a genius above all others (as they have done with other Jews) and that it’s just a lie that he was a pacifist. As is stated, he wrote to FDR to build the atomic bomb and he did this (1939 I believe) before Jews were arrested and held in concentration camps and his intended target was Germany and Germans who he was rooting against in WW I already, despite the fact he was a German citizen. There were also prominent German scientists, three Nobel Prize recipients, Stark, Wien and Lenard that said the same thing, that Einstein was highly overrated. After the war these scientists were branded anti-Semites.

    But to brand him as a nobody I think is wrong. Some of Einstein’s fellow German (non-Jewish) scientists thought highly of him, including the Nobel Prize winner Max Planck, kind of the leader of physics in Germany. Einstein was also promoted to the very prominent position of being the head of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute, Germany’s leading scientific institute. Despite this, he still apparently disliked most Germans very much. But I do not believe he was a nothing in science.

  228. BrilloPad says:
    @MarkinLA

    Exactly! “Millions” being plural, would imply at least two million or more, at a time when that would have comprised a sizable percentage of the US population.

  229. Humphrey says:
    @Biff

    The Brits didn’t see too many aeroplanes when they arrived in Australia.

  230. Saggy says: • Website
    @Reg Cæsar

    Opponents predicted that allowing Darwinists access to schoolchildren would start a long slide into amorality and decadence.

    Religion’s opposition to science is a losing battle, that should have been lost a long long time ago. But check out the complete title of Darwin’s opus …

    On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life

    Too bad they’re not teaching it today.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
  231. dually says:

    Wright Bros. – High School graduates: “We’re making a machine that flies. Once we do succeed, the results will be easy to see.”

    Academic Physicist – thirty years of education: “We haven’t a clue as to what we’re doing, but even if we succeeded, it’s too complicated to explain.”

    This is like the ridiculous arguments made by academics that Shakespeare couldn’t actually be the author of his works, because he lacked the education – as if they could teach that. These retroactive claims are made in the name of “Science”, and the so-called “Scientific Revolution” – which never actually happened, by academic dogmatists who retroactively claim all human invention on the basis of the magical thinking of “Evolutionary Progress”. It fits the “Theory”, after all.

    • Agree: ivan
  232. mikemikev says:
    @A Competent Physicist

    What Einstein did was take physics back to the drawing board and reformulate everything from scratch from general principles.

    Can you go into more detail on this?

  233. @GeeBee

    Yes, please do give us more on the subject.

    I wonder why the present queen never walked into the Equador Embassy to visit Julian Assange. Social visit. It would have ended the matter.

    • Replies: @GeeBee
  234. @Larry Romanoff

    The reason nobody knows is that the kidnappers were on very close terms with those who held control of the historical airbrush, as they still do today. And today, nobody will touch the story.

    Ditto the Nanking massacre, and plenty more besides. Yet look how forgiving China has been over all these centuries.

    While whitewashed from the Western narrative, I would hope that the historical record would be well preserved in Chinese cultural memory.

    • Replies: @Robjil
  235. @BrilloPad

    ” Max Plank was the foremost physicist of his time. “

    Finally some one on here has mentioned the great Max Plank!! So who else has his name on some of the most important phyical quantities?

  236. @mark green

    Sure , but it was that sentence that made me suggest it. maybe your writing was indicative, no offence to your post.

    • Thanks: mark green
  237. Anon[772] • Disclaimer says:

    The Eagle has Landed.

    White Power! Faggots.

    • Replies: @Petermx
    , @Malla
  238. @Roberto Gentilli

    In the 1950s several of my adult relatives occasionally travelled to England. From Australia. They all, always, travelled by ship. The ship always stopped at Aden on the way.

    • Replies: @Kapyong
  239. @Saggy

    Religion’s opposition to science is a losing battle…

    …and Jews were part of the reason. So why the silence about it?

    How can this be good? How were the finings and firings of Mr Scopes and Mrs Epperson unjust, as the ACLU claimed?

  240. @dearieme

    Even that is essentially Nazi propaganda, since in none of those three examples was the purpose the same as the Nazi’s.

    Just from their labeling, I doubt that benign intentions were behind any of the concentration camps.

    I gather that a primary use of Germany’s WWII internment camps was a source of slave labour in support of the war effort.

    As for the popular narrative of industrial-scale extermination schemes in German concentration camps, as a child I used to be a true believer, but nowadays not so much.

    It seems to me that, during WWII, when it came to butchering innocents en masse, the Japanese were way more blood-thirsty than the German Nazis, by a wide margin.

    • Replies: @Malla
  241. @annamaria

    Thank, Annamaria. Great comment.

    You know, of course, that according to the Jews the Original Sin is to know the difference between good and evil. And another major sin is to not hold your hands the right way as you wash them.

  242. Petermx says:
    @Anon

    No one used the expression “white power” then, as all the powers back then were all white with the exception of Japan, Germany’s most important ally. If Germany’s desire for peace. including with Great Britain which attacked Germany had been a reality, Europe would still lead the world as it had done for so long and China and other Asian countries would not all be passing Europe and the USA today. Thoughtful people like Charles Lindbergh and the America First Committee wanted the same thing. If the faggots that use the term “white power” as a slur had not won the argument there would never have been WW II and 60 million people would not have been killed in that war.

    • Agree: mark green
    • Replies: @Petermx
    , @Anon
  243. @Joe Stalin

    The USSR Tsar bomb was fraudulent?

    Whatever it was, it would be non-trivial to simulate the Tsar with napalm.

    The Russians could have made it 100 Megatons, but left it at 50 Megatons, because otherwise:

    1. the fireball would have been so huge it would have breached the Earth’s atmosphere, wasting precious blast energy; and

    2. the plane which dropped it wouldn’t have been able to get away in time, and would have been destroyed in the blast.

    On the plus side, the Tsar bomb eliminated the need to bend over and kiss your butt goodbye, because it would have blasted your ass clean through your face.

  244. anonimo11 says:
    @Iris

    I will be in Italy in a week. I will check it out.

  245. @Anon

    This is us.

    Strange how the subject and his immediate rear vicinity is illuminated from behind, yet beyond that, the entire landscape is in total darkness.

    Almost like a studio spotlight…

  246. Petermx says:
    @Petermx

    “White Power” advocate Charles Lindbergh speaks. Click on video embedded in the article.

    https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2011/08/26/charles-lindbergh-videos/

  247. Anon[772] • Disclaimer says:
    @Petermx

    Thoughtful people like Charles Lindbergh and the America First Committee wanted the same thing.

    Thoughtful people like Lindbergh got trashed and crushed by lying, filthy Marxist Jews and their gentile sycophants. Just like decent noble men such as Robert E Lee.

    Fuck all that. This age needs men like Bloody Bill Anderson, Nathan Bedford Forrest and Otto Skorzeny.

    It’s judgement that defeats us.

    Marxist filth are worth less than insects, and should be ruthlessly exterminated. Men, women and children.

  248. @Realist

    He not only electrocuted a hapless circus elephant, he also electrocuted many other helpless animals, dogs, monkeys, to win his unwinnable current war. His backing of DC against AC proves he was no genius inventor, simply a huckster con man out to make a buck off of other peoples ideas and labor

    • Replies: @Realist
  249. @Iris

    What color is the Moon? The answer is not as straightforward as you might think

    https://www.airspacemag.com/daily-planet/once-in-a-blue-moon-68223691/

  250. anon[327] • Disclaimer says:

    Speaking of historical blank pages,
    9-11 Commission’s 28 (blank) pages
    go down as more historical BS.

  251. @FB

    The Wright brothers made 105 flights in 1904 with a total of 50 minutes airtime including the November 9th flight of four circles of the Huffman Prairie Airfield 2.75 miles in 5 minutes airtime and the December 1st flight of four circles, 2.75 miles, five minutes airtime. 1905 at Huffman they made six flights of 11-24 miles and 17-38 minutes airtime including the October 4th flight of 20.75 miles with 33 minutes airtime and the October 5th flight of 24 miles with 38 minutes airtime. The October 5th flight was only limited by running out of fuel. 1906 & 1907 were spent in sales and promotion. August 8, 1908 was the demonstration flight in France. In September 3, 1908 the Wrights made the first hour long flight in history of 62 minutes. July 1909 they fulfilled an US Army contract stipulating a flight with pilot and one passenger, duration one hour, and an average speed of 40MPH. They received a $5,000 bonus for exceeding the stipulated average speed. The Wright brothers exceeded Bleriot’s 1909 distance in 1905, and did it twice. In 1908, when you, FB, claim the Wrights only flew 2,000ft, the Wrights made the first hour long flight in history. What the hell is wrong with you, FB? You claim to be an aeronautical engineer but are unable to get the basic history correct. You have an absurd fetish with trying to trash Americans. You make an idiot out of yourself every time you post here.

    • Agree: Gleimhart Mantooso
    • Replies: @FB
  252. psbindy says:
    @Larry Romanoff

    David Irving points out that had Churchill accepted Hitlers’ generous terms at the time they were offered, Churchill’s legacy would have been Galipoli, muddling-middling party changing politition leading to a surrender (even if on very favorable terms) nearly as quick as the French surrender.

    No glory for Winnie, so, let’s fight on the beaches and all that.

  253. BrilloPad says:
    @Iris

    Seems like I touched a nerve, since you make quite a lot out of my leaving out the ‘c’ in PlanCk’s name while typing it.

    And to accuse him of being ignorant of De Pretto’s publications is quite a stretch, and reveals another level of ignorance, but not Max’s.

    • Replies: @annamaria
  254. psbindy says:
    @Franz

    My boyhood aviation books told me that Otto Lilienthal made many glider flights using the curved airfoil copied as well as could be from the shape of bird wings. The Wrights made several Lilienthal looking gliders with about the same level of success. Their later gliders looked more like the (Wright) flyer with longer higher aspect ratio wings.

    The Wrights were the first to realise that birds turned so elegantly by banking their wings. They used wing warping to achieve this.

    At the French aviation meet (1906?) there were several other airplanes that flew more or less fine give the low power of internal combustion engines of the day. But they couldn’t turn worth a dang. They had no capacity to bank. If a wind gust put the airborne machine into a bank tragedy usually ensued.

    They did manage turns using a rudder alone but these were slow, delicately balance skids. Most of the European airplanes had a lot of dihedral (wing tips higher than the wing roots) which gave stability in straight ahead flight.

    The Wrights wowed the crowd with tight, banked turns in both directions. The banked turn is what they brought to the table. It was everything.

    The Wrights patented their wing warping concept. Every airplane builder had to pay license fees. That made them rich.

    Glen Curtiss developed the aileron to bank the wings. It was a much improved system as the wings could be made stiffer and stronger allowing for greater speed and weight carrying capacity.

    There was a drawn out court battle between the Wrights and Curtiss. The court eventually decided that ailerons were a sufficiently different method of achieving a bank for turning than wing warping that there was no patent infringement.

    Designers

  255. FB says: • Website
    @Bombercommand

    Look you stupid little worm…you know absolute ZILCH about airplanes, aeronautics, or anything having to do with aviation or aviation history…

    Here are the historical FACTS…nobody ever OBSERVED those supposed lengthy flights of the Wright Flyer III that took place at Huffman Prairie, in 1905 near Dayton, Ohio…

    To keep their knowledge from falling into competitors’ hands, the Wrights stopped flying and disassembled the airplane on November 7, 1905.

    Although the Wright Brothers had first flown a powered aircraft in 1903, and by the end of 1905 had flown their Flyer III many times (including a flight of 24 miles (39 km) in 39 minutes 23 seconds on 5 October), [which nobody ever saw] they had chosen not to make public demonstrations or allow close examination of their aircraft because they feared that this might jeopardize their prospects of commercially exploiting their discoveries.

    For TWO AND A HALF YEARS they did not fly the airplane at all…

    In 1908, they packed their airplane up and shipped it to France where they did some demonstrations flights at Le Mans…which was filmed…

    Notice that the airplane is launched by means of a catapult, where the force of a falling weight launches the airplane down a rail, in order to get airborne…

    By that year, the French Aviation scene was far ahead of the Wrights…there was a governing body established which also observed flights and set rules for records…these records included getting aloft under the airplane’s OWN power and completing a CIRCUIT…which means being able to come BACK to where you took off, instead of just making a stupid little hop like that Wright contraption…

    Henri Farman winning the Archdeacon Prize for the first closed-circuit kilometer flight in Europe

    Farman was flying an airplane built by Gabriel Voisin, the 1907 Voisin biplane…of which 60 were built and sold…

    Farman and his chief rival Leon Delagrange, also flying a Voisin competed intensely throughout 1908, snatching the world record back from each other…

    …on 13 January 1908 [Farman] won the 50,000 francs Deutsch de la Meurthe-Archdeacon Grand Prix de l’Aviation for being the first aviator to complete an officially observed 1 kilometre closed circuit flight, including taking off and landing under the aircraft’s own power.

    He also made the FIRST officially observed flight of more than 15 minutes…

    On 21 March [1908] Farman set a new record with a flight of just over 2 kilometres (1.25 miles). This was bettered by Delagrange, first with a flight of 2.5 km (1.6 mi) on 10 April and the next day with a flight of 3.925 km (2.439 mi).

    In May both aircraft were fitted with side curtains between the inner set of interplane struts,[23] and on May 30, while giving a series of demonstration flights in Italy, he succeeded in making a flight of 12.750 km (7.922 mi) lasting 15 minutes 25 seconds.[24]

    This time was bettered by Farman on 6 July, when he made a flight lasting 20 min 20 sec, a new record and winning Farman a 10,000 franc prize for the first officially observed flight lasting more than fifteen minutes.

    Those are the facts, GOOFBALL…the French were way ahead of the Wrights, where were Fred Flintstone technology in comparison…that is the history supported by FACTS and EVIDENCE…and anyone today just looking at those airplanes and having an understanding of aeronautics can easily see that it is so…

    The Wright’s mythical sustained flights in Ohio were seen and filmed by whom…?

    If there’s no picture it didn’t happen…true then and true still…

    • Replies: @Bombercommand
  256. 210.kerdasi amaq says:

    “There was no Rothschild owned FED in 1865.”

    The FED has had several incarnations in the US, the first being in 1791 when the Rothschilds managed to force through the US Congress legislation for the foundation of a privately-owned central bank called the Bank of the United States, with the Rothschilds as the main owners, and with only a 20-year charter to expire in 1811. Threatened with cancellation of the charter, the European bankers plunged the US into the war of 1812. After the war, the Rothschilds managed to have the bank’s charter renewed for another 20 years.

    After that, Andrew Jackson killed the bank’s charter and the US national debt went to zero for the first and last time in the nation’s history. But in retaliation, the Bank’s president Nicholas Biddle, an agent for the Paris-based Jacob Rothschild, immediately cut off all funding to the US government and plunged the country into a deep depression. Simultaneously, the same bankers plunged the US into a war with Mexico, greatly exacerbating the economic hardship.

    In 1863, the US Congress passed the National Banking Act that reinstated the Rothschild’s privately-owned US central bank, but Lincoln was re-elected President the following year and vowed to repeal the act as soon as he took his oath of office. Lincoln was killed and so was the Rothschild’s FED.

    The third incarnation of the Rothschild’s US Central Bank, the US Federal Reserve, has existed since 1913, its sole challenger being Kennedy who issued billions of silver-backed certificates by the Treasury Department, in fact the US issuing its own money and bypassing the FED. This is almost certainly why Kennedy was killed.

    Several US Presidents have been assassinated for threatening to kill the Rothschild FED, as well as Louis McFadden, Chairman of the Banking and Currency Committee, and attempts on Andrew Jackson. There is circumstantial evidence this was behind the Lindberg kidnapping and the destruction of Charles’ reputation, for exposing the war provocation by the same bankers and for threatening again to kill the FED if elected.

    • Agree: Johnny Walker Read
    • Thanks: annamaria
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  257. @Anon

    Apart from showing that you completely misunderstand the position of the Crown since Britain became a constitutional monarchy in which the monarch does not control the nation’s money you are plain wrong when you say
    “The Boer wars permanently crippled the Afrikaners”
    Total BS. From 1948 to the end of Apartheid Agrikaners were in control.

  258. @A Competent Physicist

    And thanks to Ron Unz, once a theoretical physicist, highlighting this Comment and thereby helping to limit the credibility of Larry Romanoff’s autodidact’s BS. Let’s assertions about Bell, Edison et al may be interesting to follow up but I guess anything new and correct about Einstein would be a reward for a lucky amateur. And there is, fatally for me, the Rothschild fetish which in this case is combined with Rothschild owning the FED when it didn’t even exist!

  259. Thomasina says:

    Larry Romanoff – that was an excellent article, very interesting and well-researched. Thank you!

    • Agree: annamaria
  260. Kapyong says:
    @Rdm

    “Similarly, we can also see that if someone claims Mark Zuckerberg is a true genius, transformed how people interact, revolutionized the way social interaction behave, it’d be absurd, don’t you think? “

    It is claimed that Facebook’s key technology (large scaling of social media) was stolen from Michael McKibben’s Leader Technologies, with the help of IBM’s Eclipse Foundation and lawyer James P. Chandler III :

    https://aim4truth.org/2017/11/21/facebook-unmasked-how-the-worlds-most-relevant-entrepreneur-was-screwed-by-zuckerberg/

    Leader took it to court, but failed :
    https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/799485/leader-technologies-inc-v-facebook-inc/

  261. Kapyong says:
    @Ann Nonny Mouse

    “In the 1950s several of my adult relatives occasionally travelled to England. From Australia. They all, always, travelled by ship. The ship always stopped at Aden on the way.”

    Yup, my parents did exactly the same in the late 1950s, including the stop at busy popular Aden (less so now.)

    Seems a trip to Europe by sea was a common coming-of-age experience for Aussies then.

  262. @sergei32

    Damned accursed Americans. Hustlers, hucksters, thieves, and knaves. Can’t wait for the whole shameful country, its filthy and utterly ugly, destructive, culture, and its essentially knavish greedy predatory population to vanish.

    Not gonna happen.

    By the way, it sounds like you have a very shitty life. Tell me what country you’re from so I’ll know why.

  263. GeeBee says:
    @Saggy

    Which reminds me, whatever has happened to Wally?

  264. @Agent76

    Re, the video. If all these Germans were mind-controlled robots incapable of thinking for themselves, then how and where did they find the wherewithal to create the world’s greatest music, roads, innovations in chemistry and physics etc?

    Tripe. Designed to make helpless idiots out of those who view the video. To excuse and justify their resentiment. “We may not accomplish much, but we’re freeeeeeeeeeee. We’re carefree flower children. Every thing we need to know we learned in kindergarten.” (You know, kindergarten, that evil Prussian innovation–even spelled the German way!)

  265. @flashlight joe

    “as Parmenides said 2500 years ago.”

    The ancient Indo-European Greeks were as far ahead of the Jews in spiritual insights as the Germans of WW2 were ahead of the Papuans in technical matters.

  266. @dearieme

    “My father saw Belsen, you prick.”

    And was this before or after Germany had been subjected to a naval blockade for six years, after virtually every city of importance had been bombed day and night, after all rail lines, bridges and dams had been targeted, every power installation destroyed? After, in short, all means of feeding and caring for the denizens of Belsen had been systematically destroyed by the Allies? Who then swept in and acted outraged by the direct consequences of their own genocidal campaign of sadistic carnage? When every German citizen was living on 1800 calories a day, a good part of that being synthetic fats and ersatz coffee and the like?

    What your father saw means little in and of itself if he hadn’t the knowledge to put it in its proper context, its frame.

  267. GeeBee says:
    @dearieme

    So did many other British soldiers. What does it prove? That many inmates were dead and starving. What does that prove? Very little, except that the Allies’ relentless bombing campaign had made it impossible to provision these camps, and especially so with regard to medical supplies, which accounts for most of the dead bodies. Typhus fever had devastated Belsen in the weeks prior to the British arriving there.

    Those who had not contracted typhus were surprisingly fit and well fed. There are photographs of them taken innocently by the British. But, of course, they are never shown in the MSM.

    Also, the camp was something of a R&R installation, with many German nurses staffing it, working hard in a desperate attempt to alleviate suffering against all odds. And what was their fate? Hanging, by order of the kangaroo court we call Nuremberg.

  268. Realist says:
    @grimfandango

    His backing of DC against AC proves he was no genius inventor, simply a huckster con man out to make a buck off of other peoples ideas and labor

    Absolutely correct he was an avaricious prick.

  269. @Saggy

    I have three comments to make and I invite response.
    1. It is possible now for a MSM interviewer or presenter to suggest that the true figure, despite endless repetition still of the 6 million in every documentary, might be as little as 4.5 million. I have previously cited Geraldine Doogue’s ABC Saturday Extra program for this;. That’s in Australia of course;
    2. It would be surprising if some Jew who was in Auschwicz or another nominated death camp hadn’t responded to the chance to make a very large amount of money by coming clean on what really happened if mass murders didn’t take place::
    3. Long after it was plainly impossible for Jews to be sent to Madagascar, or Palestine, or eastern Russia, Jewish old people and women and children were rounded up and shipped to camps in Poland from France, Holland, Belgium, Italy and Hungary. Why, if it was not to kill all Jews whose value as labour didn’t keep them alive?

    • Replies: @Saggy
  270. @Just another serf

    When you have a point with a sliver of credibility to make why spoil it by such absurdities as your “trillion[s] of tons of munitions [sic] dropped on every square inch [sic] of Germany….”? (The continued bombing of cities actually had good military value as Albert Speer admitted on camera. That was because of the number of troops and guns, as well as ammunition, which was diverted from fighting the Soviet Union and then the other Allies).

  271. Vojkan says:
    @mikemikev

    You see, there’s a tiny little glitch with his statement. Taking physics to the drawing board requires doing some serious math, and even the most faithful “Einsteinolatres” admit that Albert was next to worthless at math. The Einstein myth is like the “holocaust”, it has more holes than a wheel of French Emmenthal, to the point that finding the cheese between the holes requires quite an effort at mind gymnastics.

    • Replies: @A Competent Physicist
  272. I was interested to see the wagons circling around Einstein and the defenses mounted in his behalf but, on close examination, those defenses consisted mostly of an amalgam of questionable personal opinions and undocumented claims combined with a flood of irrelevancies that served only to smoke up the room. I had no idea there were so many people interested in putting lipstick on a pig.

    Since authors are expected to document and provide credible citations for each and every claim proffered, rebuttals should necessarily be held to the same conditions. As an example, I am unaware of any existing evidence that would support the following claims (among many others). I would therefore ask that the writer provide credible citiations for each of the below statements since each appears to be based solely on wishful thinking that is provably false:

    149.A Competent Physicist says:

    “[Einstein] gives credit to the men who made his theory of special relativity possible. Poincaré, Lorenz and Maxwell are key figures.”

    ” Einstein never claimed to be [a lone genius] and insisted he stood on the shoulders of giants. He gave credit everywhere it was due.”

    “Even E=mc² is lingering in his equations but it’s subtle and difficult to find.”

    “What Einstein did was take physics back to the drawing board and reformulate everything from scratch from general principles.”

    “Regarding General Relativity, Hilbert got to the field equations first by five days but Einstein had laid down the conceptual framework.”

    “In one of his own unpublished papers Einstein discovered the field equations as early as 1910.”

    ” Einstein was a key player and unarguably the most important one in the field of Relativity.”
    .

    In particular, several commenters have stated (or suggested) that Einstein was widely accepted as a towering figure by his contemporaries. These claims are so substantially important as to demand credible documentation. Can any of Einstein’s apologists provide credible references documenting that Einstein’s contemporaries recognised his brilliance or competence in the field of physics (or anything else)? Can anyone provide credible references where any of Einstein’s contemporaries credited him with the discovery of anything? Can anyone provide credible references where Einstein gave credit for anything to anyone?

    Several commenters have stated that plagiarism was widespread and acceptable at the time. If this claim is true, why is Einstein standing alone as the only ‘prominent’ physicist to be accused of it? Please could a reader supply credible citations documenting that other prominent physicists of the day (Henri Poincaré, James Maxwell, Hendrik Lorentz, Joseph Larmor, Olinto De Pretto, Robert Brown, Ludwig Boltzmann, Friedrich Hasenöhrl, Sir Edmund Whittaker) also freely plagiarised the work of others and did so without credit.
    .

    149.A Competent Physicist says:

    “It’s important to realize physics is a group enterprise.”

    Physics is no more a ‘group enterprise’ than is baking a cake and, if it were, then every science is a group enterprise so please would you list the primary plagiarists in astronomy, chemistry and biology?
    .

    Lastly, for what it’s worth, I could make the same statements and ask for the same credible references of the apologists for the Wright Brothers – who all managed to ignore the massive historical fraud perpetrated by the Smithsonian.

    • Thanks: mark green
    • LOL: FB
    • Replies: @gaston julia
    , @FB
  273. Malla says:
    @Anon

    That sign of the NS Eagle is a Uranus based sign. After 2150 AD, will come the age of Uranus for 1000 years, sun will move into Aquarius from Pisces (Sun in Pisces=Jesus). Hitler spoke of a 1000 year Reich. Very interesting. Is the Reich still to come? Will mankind be saved from the Satanic elites?

  274. Malla says:
    @Emily

    Stanley Kubrick, the genius Jewish director who gave us commoners a glimpse of life among the Satanic elites with movies like “Eyes Wide Shut” .
    An insider guy among the Satanic power elite who did a lot for humanity by exposing the evil ways of that Satanic world and probably paid for it with his life.
    But guess what he said a few days before he “died” or let us say assassinated.
    From
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_and_religious_beliefs_of_Stanley_Kubrick
    Frederic Raphael, who co-authored the Eyes Wide Shut script with Kubrick, says that the director once remarked that “Hitler was right about almost everything”,.

    Yup even he realized, Hitler was right.

    • Thanks: annamaria
  275. Malla says:
    @Ultrafart the Brave

    But the Japs too were victims of “official history” propaganda.

    http://www.sdh-fact.com/
    Society for the Dissemination of Historical Facts

    From the German side, we have

    http://www.ihr.org/
    Institute for Historical Review

    • Thanks: Ultrafart the Brave
  276. CBTerry says:
    @Larry Romanoff

    That paragraph goes on: “Around 15,000 Chinese labourers helped to build the Canadian Pacific Railway — working in harsh conditions for little pay, they suffered greatly and historians estimate that at least 600 died. Their employment caused controversy, particularly in British Columbia, where politicians worried about the potential economic and cultural impact of this influx of Chinese workers.”

    That is indeed just a “passing comment” as to millions of Chinese being kidnapped by/for the Rothschild British East India Company.

    Do you have any additional evidence? It would make for sensational reading.

    • Replies: @dearieme
  277. Emslander says:

    To add insult to injury, Coca-Cola moved into Spain in 1953, sued the original Spanish owners, then bullied, extorted and bought the rights for a pittance, permitting the firm to continue producing only a single alcoholic beverage under their name.

    Using American courts and well-paid law firms to steal multimillion dollar business ideas is a beloved American tradition.

    We all know about Kroc’s theft of the McDonald brothers fast food concept in Oak Park, Illinois. There is more. On the side of two-lane highway US24 in eastern Illinois sits a traditional small town restaurant that existed for twenty years before Kroc came along. It’s named Macdonalds. The McDonald corporation has harassed the owners of that establishment for years, sending them cease and desist letters and filing lawsuits that, wrongly, claim that they are diluting McDonald’s brand. Many people have come to the aid of the little restaurant’s legal defense. So, it has managed to stay open with its original name, because it can be shown that it existed earlier than did the big corporation.

  278. anonimo11 says:
    @Zarathustra

    It does not matter. Once you have the equations you can immediately derive the law of gravitation for the specific case of circular orbits. It will take some algebra for elliptical orbits, and indeed you need Kepler’s Second law also. But for circular you only need the Third (plus Huygens’ formula).

  279. Funny the two greatest American hoaxes are never mentioned here.
    1) Americans never walked on the moon:
    https://centerforaninformedamerica.com/moondoggie/

    2)Nuclear weapons don’t exist:
    https://blog.banditobooks.com/two-frauds-in-one/

    Perhaps these hoaxes will be addressed in a future article

  280. AKindle says:
    @Iris

    Why should they replicate that? The moon is rock and sand with nothing on it. Kill yourself anti white Beeeyooootch. You are just another anti white that has never accomplished anything..

  281. AKindle says:
    @Iris

    My God you are anti white pathetic. Please kill yourself now.

  282. jiri says:

    This article is banned from being posted in facebook.

    So, it must be worth reading.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  283. @FB

    In order to make your case, you are forced to assert that the Wright’s 1904 and 1905 flights never occurred and that the Wright’s fraudulently claimed they made these flights. You clearly make that charge. By doing this you toss yourself in the fetid, crackpot bucket that contains the Lunar Landing Hoaxers, and disqualify yourself from any serious discussion on the development of the aeroplane. The Wrights were secretive, but have volumous, detailed technical records that are undisputed by any historian, as well as their wind tunnel for testing, and their discovery and correction of the flaws in Lillenthal’s equations for wing design. After the Wright’s August 1908 demonstration at Le Mans, no one in France disputed that the Wright’s were the first to make a controlled flight by aeroplane. None of the Europeans understood that roll control was essential for controlled flight. There is no evidence that ailerons/wing warping or anything like it were fitted to European aircraft prior to the Wright’s 1908 demonstration. The Wright’s successfully flew controlled flight in 1904 & 1905, that is undisputed historical fact. The Wright’s main innovation was active pilot control of roll, pitch, and yaw intended to obtain controlled instability so that the pilot can maneuver the aeroplane freely. The Europeans in contrast were obsessed with stability, a recipe for catastrophic crashes. The first Voison models did not even have features to provide “spin stability”. It was Farman, who bought and modified a Voison, who made the first attempt to get “spin stability” by adding dihedral to the upper wing(visible in the photo in your comment). This was meant to provide stabile level straight line flight. There was no direct lateral control by the pilot. Given that, I find that the claim the 1907 Farman made controlled turns dubious. How did Farman make a turn, by shifting his body weight? Laughable. To return to the question when did Farman install ailerons on his aeroplane, no one claims it was before the Wright’s 1908 demonstration in France. But when? The Farman’s went through considerable change and early and later models are easily distinguished, however Farman did not keep the detailed records the Wrights did. There is a newspaper account(in French) of his October 30, 1908 flight that mentions ailerons were fitted but states they were “to augment lateral stability”, no mention of roll control, or details of the apparatus that controlled these alleged ailerons. The photo shows a craft of the distinctly primitive early type, no ailerons visible. There is a claim the Farman III had ailerons fitted April 1909, but no documentation, but maybe I an missing something. The earliest photo I can find is a Farman from 1910, with clearly visible very large full wing length ailerons, Farman later reduced their size considerably. The 1910 Farman has wings considerably different from his early models, which are crude and flappy looking. The wings of the 1910 Farman are clearly heavily influenced by the elegant, sophisticated wing of the Wright 1908 model flown in France. No, the French were not far ahead of the Wrights, and as usual, FB, you are both incoherent and psychotic.

  284. jiri says:
    @The Alarmist

    This article is banned from being posted in facebook.

    So, it must be worth reading.

  285. GeeBee says:
    @Ann Nonny Mouse

    Well, it’s interesting first of all to have a look at this video clip:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OB0YAVF-eOI&feature=youtu.be

    The footage was shot in 1933, and in it, the young Princess Elizabeth (now Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II) and her younger sister Princess Margaret are shown with their uncle Edward (then the Prince of Wales, and briefly later King Edward VIII, of whom more anon) and their aunt, the Duchess of York (formerly Lady Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon, prior to her marriage to King George V’s second son, the Duke of York). The Duke of York, of course, unexpectedly became King George VI, on the abdication of his brother, and Lady Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon is best remembered as Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother.

    In the film-clip they are being instructed by Prince Edward in the art of making the ‘Nazi salute’. Edward was one of several British royals and aristocracy who wholeheartedly supported Adolf Hitler. Some gave tacit or clandestine support, others were far more outspoken. In the latter category were numbered the second Duke of Westminster, the 12th Duke of Bedford, the Duke of Hamilton and the ‘mere’ baronet, Sir Oswald Mosely, as well as many others. The Prince of Wales was, by virtue of his position, obliged to keep his views to himself and his immediate circle of friends. And of course, as the video indicates, his family.

    Now, a little known snippet of information is that Charles Corbin, the French ambassador to the Court of St. James from 1933 – 1940, revealed to a French colleague that Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin had told him that King Edward VIII had told Baldwin that he would abdicate if called upon to declare war on Germany. In the event, this is of course precisely what happened. King Edward’s love of twice-divorced American heiress Wallis Warfield Simpson was the stated reason. “I am giving up my throne to marry the woman I love” was the famous announcement from his Windsor home, Fort Belvedere. The advice of the king’s ‘great friend’ Winston Churchill was evidently crucial in persuading Edward to take this unprecedented step. Bearing in mind what Edward had told Baldwin, it had become vital that the king was got rid of, in order to remove what would have been an insurmountable obstacle to Britain’s much wanted war with Germany.

    Churchill, of course, was by then effectively an ‘asset’ of the Jewish financial international, who wanted at all costs to remove the Third Reich from the face of the earth. They correctly considered Hitler to pose an existential threat to their plan of global hegemony. Just like others who have stood in their way, from Presidents like Lincoln, Hamilton and Kennedy and rfom countries such as Iraq, Libya and Iran, ‘regime change’ is the standard Jewish tactic.

    No-one is allowed to stand in their way, and no-one is allowed even to have a government of which Jews do not approve. The Second World War was merely the first – if by far the bloodiest and criminal – example of ‘regime change’.

    Oh how I long for the day when this long-hidden truth finally gains the traction it deserves.

    • Thanks: Ann Nonny Mouse
  286. 288.CBTerry says:

    “That is indeed just a “passing comment” as to millions of Chinese being kidnapped by/for the Rothschild British East India Company.”

    I wrote that only one Canadian website made even a passing reference to the fact that those Chinese laborers had been kidnapped by slave traders. You asked for the reference and I provided it. There were indeed millions of Chinese kidnapped; Hence my comment, “That’s why there are Chinese all over the world.” It was a careless mis-statement on my part to suggest the entire lot was shipped to North America as railroad labor. That was not correct, and I apologise. The other facts in my post were correct as stated.

    If I may suggest, the more important concern is not the absolute number of persons but the method and terms of their transition to North America and why the entire Canadian and American media, historical, publishing, and educational systems, have buried these facts.

    “Do you have any additional evidence? It would make for sensational reading.”

    Yes. I have a 700-page manuscript with about 400 citations that is awaiting publication. It is in Chinese. Where would you like me to send it?

    • Replies: @CBTerry
    , @S
    , @S
  287. @Larry Romanoff

    Can anyone provide credible references where any of Einstein’s contemporaries credited him with the discovery of anything?

    Does the Nobel prize for discovery of the law of the photoelectric effect qualify?

    https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/1921/summary/

    I think if you were able to read and understand his work (say, on less “controversial” subjects, such as diffusion, or light quantization) you would certainly come away with a less extreme opinion. This “third rate patent clerk” stuff is really off the mark.

    • Replies: @Iris
    , @TheTrumanShow
  288. pbridge says:

    Re the Australian aviation inventor. see ” Lawrence Hargrave. Explorer, Inventor, aviation experimenter” by Shaw and Ruhen. Cassell 1977. Also entries online in the Australian Dictionary of Biography.

    American ‘Intelligence’ was totally controlled by British agents in both World Wars.
    There are good books on this with great detail.

    It is good to see Larry Romanoff’s interest in this area. I was impressed by his articles on Global Research and will read wider on his investigations, especially that re the missing German POWs in the USA.

    That it was/is our side that wears the ‘black hat’ becomes more evident by the day. Be afraid….

  289. @Svevlad

    The country that we are prohibited from criticizing or even mentioning.

  290. 299.gaston julia says:

    “This “third rate patent clerk” stuff is really off the mark.”

    If you read carefully, I stated that Einstein was a “third-class patent clerk”, not a “third-rate patent clerk”. That was not a slight. It was his official job classification.

    Einstein did indeed win a Nobel Prize in 1921, but it was a kind of catch-all award “for his services to Theoretical Physics” the photo-electrics added as an afterthought – which field is in any case a very long way from E=mc² and field equations for general relativity. However, the image-bulding process was in full swing long before that, and Einstein’s promoters had him nominated for a Nobel Prize 62 separate times before they finally succeeded. And none of his awards were in the field where his apologists claim the man had “knowledge that spanned the universe”. Also, Max Planck and Albert Einstein repeatedly exchanged favors by nominating each other for a Nobel prize.

    Things are not always what they seem.

    • Replies: @gaston julia
  291. roonaldo says:

    Over at e-catworld.com, a commenter on the “aharonov-bohm effect” entry linked to http://www.orgonelab.org/miller.htm, which describes Dayton Miller’s light-beam interferometer experiments that detected Maxwellian ether. Theorizing about the ether (aether) was a serious pursuit of 19th century scientists, including James Clerk Maxwell. The celebrated Michelson-Morley experiment in 1887 supposedly disproved the existence of an ether, but even their data showed a positive effect.

    Miller carried out far more sophisticated and extensive experiments from 1906 to the mid 1930s, particularly at Mt. Palomar from 1925-26.

    No one was able to refute his findings. Einstein, in a July 1925 letter to Edwin E. Slosson, stated “should the positive results be confirmed, then the Special Theory of Relativity and with it the General Theory of Relativity, in its current form, would be invalid.” Miller published additional results of his experiments in 1933 in Reviews of Modern Physics. Here my notes end, but the piece goes on to describe how Einstein and others later brazenly distorted and misrepresented Miller’s experimental design and data and published a hit-piece chalking up Miller’s ether drift results to temperature fluctuations, a potential distortion which Miller had assiduously guarded against.

  292. FB says: • Website

    Well, as usual for this website, I see a lot of fools with ZERO actual knowledge or experience in the subject of flight, blowing a lot of hot air about things they cannot possibly understand…

    On the subject of roll control of an aircraft…that is to say, its ability to bank into a turn…the Wright Brothers implemented the idea of warping the wing in order to make one wing go down [due to loss of lift], while the other goes up, due to increase of lift…thereby causing the airplane to bank and fly a turning flight path…

    The Wrights patented this idea, and spent most of their energy going to court instead of advancing aeronautical science…unlike others, like the French experimenters and Americans like Glenn Curtiss, who were in fact responsible for making pretty much ALL of the major advances that resulted in practical flying machines…and saw the airplane become a powerful tool of war within just a few short years…

    In fact in the US, the government had to step in and basically nullify the Wrights’ claims in order to allow the nascent aircraft industry to advance in the runup to World War One…

    It’s abundantly clear that the various blowhards bloviating here have never even received basic instruction in a training airplane like a Cessna…if they had, they would know that the airplane can be banked just fine without aileron input, using the rudder alone…’picking up a wing’ with rudder is done all the time, for instance when a gust causes the wing to drop to one side…

    Many small radio control models, and even some piloted very light aircraft have no roll control at all, using the rudder only to make turns…relying on the dihedral effect…

    The early French aircraft were likewise controllable in the lateral plane by means of rudder and dihedral effect…

    We note also that the Wrights’ wing warping strategy was quickly abandoned in favor of ailerons, which are movable flap-like surfaces on the trailing edge of the wing…

    Here we clearly see the ailerons being deflected in flight on the Farman III model of 1909, flown here by Louis Paulhan at the Dominguez Field, Los Angeles in 1910…

    Glen Curtiss pioneered the aileron in the US, but was pursued in court by the Wrights who seemed to think that they owned the very idea of banking an airplane in flight, as opposed to just one aerodynamic method of doing so…and not a very good one at that, since ailerons are used exclusively on every real airplane to the present day…

    Curtiss was the real American pioneer of flight by any objective measure…

    On July 4, 1908, he flew 5,080 ft (1,550 m) to win the Scientific American Trophy and its $2,500 prize.[15] This was considered to be the first pre-announced public flight of a heavier-than-air flying machine in America. The flight of the June Bug propelled Curtiss and aviation firmly into public awareness.

    The June Bug on its prize-winning historic flight with Curtiss at the controls

    Here is the FIRST real airplane…

    A reproduction of the Bleriot XI of 1909, owned and flown by Mikael Carlson

    As for the Wrights’ flying machines, they were dreadful flyers…completely unstable and difficult to control…a model of the first Flyer has been recreated and subjected to aerodynamic testing and found to be almost impossible to fly…it’s almost unbelievable that these aviation ‘pioneers’ decided to shut down for nearly THREE YEARS while the airplane science made massive leaps around them…

    As I said previously, they certainly do deserve a FAIR share of credit…they did advance the science with their experiments and wind tunnel models, and did produce a very good propeller…but these were really baby steps that would soon be eclipsed by many others…had they applied themselves to experimenting like the rest of the early aviators, instead of sitting in court, they might have accomplished a lot more…

    • Replies: @Bombercommand
  293. Petermx says:
    @GeeBee

    “Edward was one of several British royals and aristocracy who wholeheartedly supported Adolf Hitler.” Rarely in life does anyone in the world wholeheartedly support anyone else or agree with everything they say. Influential Jews labelled anyone opposed to war with Germany a “NAZI sympathizer”. The term, like “racist” today, applied to anyone they did not like. By late 1944 it was pretty clear only a miracle [weapon or 2] could turn the tide of the war. Germany’s cities were being pummeled regularly with 30,000 killed here, 10,000 killed there and in Dresden at least 135,000 killed in a matter of hours spaced over 2 days. Any remaining civilians walking on the street were shot at with machine gun fire. American and British (often Jewish owned) media reported this with great satisfaction. Anyone that didn’t want all those “NAZIS” dead was a “NAZI sympathizer”, including all those 3 month old “NAZIS” and their mothers. There was no distinguishing.

    Quoting the Polish ambassador to the US, Jerzy Potocki. in his 1938 report back to Warsaw on his observations of the American political scene:

    “The pressure of the Jews on President Roosevelt and on the State Department is becoming ever more powerful… The Jews are right now the leaders in creating a war psychosis which would plunge the entire world into war and bring about general catastrophe. This mood is becoming more and more apparent. In their definition of democratic states, the Jews have also created real chaos; they have mixed together the idea of democracy and communism, and have above all raised the banner of burning hatred against Nazism.

    This hatred has become a frenzy. It is propagated everywhere and by every means: in theaters, in the cinema, and in the press. The Germans are portrayed as a nation living under the arrogance of Hitler which wants to conquer the whole world and drown all of humanity in an ocean of blood. In conversations with Jewish press representatives, I have repeatedly come up against the inexorable and convinced view that war is inevitable. This international Jewry exploits every means of propaganda to oppose any tendency towards any kind of consolidation and understanding between nations. In this way, the conviction is growing steadily but surely in public opinion here that the Germans and their satellites, in the form of fascism, are enemies who must be subdued by the ‘democratic world.’ ”

    There is much more where that came from. When German troops took Warsaw they found this letter in Polish government records. It was reported in at least one of Germany’s leading newspapers early in the war. Do you think this may have played a part in German “anti-Semitism” and the rough treatment Jews received during the war? No wonder Jews called Lindbergh an “anti-Semite” when he said Jews, the British and the FDR administration were pushing the US into war with Germany. But they didn’t mean it as a compliment here either.

    https://www.inconvenienthistory.com/6/2/3294

  294. teo toon says:
    @Wade

    Here:
    http://annavonreitz.com/actof1871.pdf

    When looking at the intent of all this, given that the actual District of Columbia was set up in 1790 and fully chartered by 1801, the aim of the Act of 1871 is, it appears, merely to set up “U.S. Corp”—“That all that part of the territory of the United States included within the limits of the District of Columbia be, and the same is hereby, created into a governmentby the name ofthe “District of Columbia”, by which name it is hereby constituted abody corporatefor municipal purposes … and exercise all other powers of a municipal corporation.” – Act of 1871 verbiage—So the Act of 1871 was to create a private corporation owned by the actual government of theDistrict of Columbia— the infamousDistrict of Columbia Municipal Corporation…

  295. dearieme says:
    @CBTerry

    That is indeed just a “passing comment” as to millions of Chinese being kidnapped by/for the Rothschild British East India Company.

    Are you saying that the Rothschilds used the EIC to kidnap Chinese, including the Chinese who built the CPR?

  296. SafeNow says:

    This essay explains one reason why I play chess. One is what one is. What is true is true, period. No glib media commentator, not even Wikipedia or the N.Y. Times, can change the performance rating of a chess player. I am, alas, merely mid-pack, but I enjoy the fact that my ability is pure and political correctness cannot change it. At least so far.

    • Replies: @Stop Clinton and Bush
  297. Well la-di-dah.
    I think there’s something to say for how far you run with the football in your hand.
    Many things invented were actually by accident — but the person who stumbled upon it had to make the observation. If they hadn’t made the observation, nothing would have been “discovered”.
    Alot of ideas are only half-baked — perhaps it’s just a theory. But maybe it does take someone else to notice it, and run with it fully to bring it to fruition. Whereas, the original idea person might have left it on the drawing board — and left it there to be forgotten.
    It’s not where you get the football passed to you, it’s how far you run with it, and what you do with it.

  298. It’s true, Einstain was constructed. This, so called, man of the 20th Century, never invented anything. His equations were a combination of plagiarized material and fantasy. The idea of a frabic making up space and time is ridiculous.

  299. annamaria says:
    @Morton's toes

    Mrs./Mr. Morton’s toes, Elie Wiesel, a well-known fraud and holobiz profiteer, was awarded Noble Prize. Among other recipients of Noble Prize was a major war criminal B. Obama who started two wars of aggression, one in Libya and another in Syria.
    If you want to talk about associations and allusions, here is one for you to ponder about:

    Or this one: “America’s Jewish ambassador to Ukraine lauds neo-Nazi Ukrainian party:”
    Wiesel: http://www.eliewieseltattoo.com/the-evidence/photographic-evidence/gigantic-fraud-carried-out-for-wiesel-nobel-prize/
    Obama: https://www.pravdareport.com/opinion/123714-obama_war_criminal/

    • Thanks: mark green, Iris
    • Replies: @chuckywiz
  300. annamaria says:
    @Realist

    Just to reinforce your statement about enterprising Einstein.

    • Thanks: Realist
  301. annamaria says:
    @BrilloPad

    You accused the informed article of being “tabloid rag” because of what? If you want to clutch to Einstein’s divine image, this is your choice, but don’t try to impose your uninformed opinions on others.
    Einstein was a Plagiarizer. Honest scientists are always very careful with referencing their publications and paying respectful dues to their predecessors. The dishonest ones love appropriating other peoples’ ideas and solutions. A. Einstein belonged to the second kind.

    • Replies: @chuckywiz
  302. Anon[126] • Disclaimer says:

    Historical frauds, HIV-AIDS?

  303. syonredux says:
    @dearieme

    I wouldn’t get too exited. These kinds of hatchet-jobs are easy to do. For example, Some fellow named Nick Kollerstrom did one on Newton:

    The Dark Side of Isaac Newton: Science’s Greatest Fraud?

    Isaac Newton was accorded a semi-divine status in the 18th and 19th centuries, whereby his image linked together religion and science. The real human being behind the demi-god image has tended to be lost. He was a person who took credit from others, and crushed the reputations of those to whom he owed most. This most brilliant of mathematicians could alas be devious, deceptive and duplicitous. This work doesn’t go looking at unpublished alchemical musings as is nowadays fashionable, rather it sticks to the historical record. At the time when the new science was born, we scrutinize the ways in which he failed to discover the law of gravity or invent calculus. What exactly did Leibniz mean by describing him as ‘a mind neither fair nor honest’? Why did Robert Hooke describe him as ‘the veriest knave in all the house’ and why was the astronomer Flamsteed calling him SIN (Sir Isaac Newton)?We are here concerned to give him credit for what he did discover, which may not be quite what you had been told. This book redefines the genius of Isaac Newton, but without the heavily mythologised baggage of a bygone era. He believed in one God, one law and one bank.

    He also wrote a book where he blamed Britain for World War I and World War II:

    How Britain Initiated both World Wars

  304. chuckywiz says:
    @annamaria

    Be careful. You may be labelled an Anti-Semite out of now where.
    Thanks for the link on the “Wiesel the Fraud”.
    He was supposed to be in Auschwitz which was liberated by the USSR. How the “Fraud” ended up in American hands? Anyone?

  305. chuckywiz says:
    @annamaria

    Why they dont talk about Plank’s Equation that is similar to Einstein. Beside how could be 1 pound of horse shit be equal to so much energy. E=mC2. It is just a theory, there is no use of it yet. My theory is God is a woman (she). Prove me it otherwise.
    Einstein did not believe expanding universe, Always arguments with Hubbles. Einstein always argued with Neil Bohr on Quantum Mechanic and wanted a physical proof (as a classical physicist). Bringing God to support his beliefs upon which Bohr once told Einstein not to tell God what to do. Speed of light is not constant according to new work carried out in the labs. Einstein did not believe that atom could be split. Some British scientist originated the idea, name slipped from my memory.
    As a Patent clerk Einstein had all the time in world to read others ideas and use it if applicable.

    • Replies: @FB
  306. CBTerry says:
    @Larry Romanoff

    Actually I did not ask for the refence, that was Culpepper.

    Unless I am misreading your refence, it does not say that the Chinese were kidnapped by slave traders, let alone “Jewish slave traders and brought forcibly to North America as free labor for the owners of the railroads – their friends. This was part of Rothschild’s British East India Company that specialized in slave trading along with growing and selling opium, plundering and killing.”

    If the 700 page manuscript supports these claims, yes, it would make for sensational reading and I would like to see it. I do not read Chinese, but I have a friend who is fluent in Mandarin.

    Now, how you could get that to me would be the challenge, as I have no desire to make my private information public. Let me know if you have a solution to this conundrum. But I would also be happy with more prosaic sources. Thank you.

  307. Mefobills says:
    @dearieme

    I gather than those who’ve tried to repeat it report that it doesn’t work which is, apparently, just as well because if it had worked it would have killed him – or whoever he had holding the string.

    He was reproducing something in his sealed jars, and others were taking it on the road. It also spread throughout Europe in repeated experiments. I don’t have the energy to look deeper into it, so go right ahead and do it on your own. Franklin even mentions that it didn’t work too well in humid climates, meaning the jar probably had residual moisture in it.

    So, the two concepts are at odds. A cotton string filled with water isn’t a very good insulator and probably would have killed him if there was lighting hit. But, somehow there was proof of electricity.

    Franklins mode of current path goes from positive to negative, so he even developed some of the math.

    They called the American revolution “prometheus” fire in honor of Franklin.

  308. syonredux says:
    @dearieme

    I’m quite sure that the true origin of concentration camps is lost in the mists of antiquity. Indeed, I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that Caesar used them in his exceedingly brutal campaign in Gaul. Anyway, here’s another antecedent , this one dating back to 17th century Russia, the Katorga:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katorga

    • Replies: @dearieme
  309. FB says: • Website
    @Larry Romanoff

    Your responses to ‘Competent Phycisist’ are ridiculous and scientifically illiterate…

    You obviously have ZERO clue about the science of physics…Competent Physicist pointed out the massive contribution of Scottish scientist James Clerk Maxwell, who formulated the theory of electromagnetism, which does indeed underpin much of Einstein’s work decades later…this is clear to any student of physics at the college level…

    Yet you chose to contest this…it’s like the guy trying take down a B52 bomber with a slingshot…

    The story of electricity and magnetism is vast. The 19’th century formulation of the theory of electromagnetism, which led to sweeping revolutions in science and technology, has been called by no less than Einstein ‘the most important even in physics since Newton’s time.’

    Randall Knight, Physics for Scientists and Engineers

    And so begins a nearly 400-page section on electricity and magnetism in this standard college text…

    Maxwell’s contributions to the field of electromagnetism were especially significant because the laws he formulated are basic to all forms of electromagnetic phenomena. His work is as important as Newton’s work on the laws of motion and the theory of gravitation.

    Raymond Serway, Physics for Scientists and Engineers

    Maxwell’s work similarly did not emerge from some kind of vacuum, a ‘cake’ baking itself, to use your half-baked metaphor…it built on a number of previous leaps forward, by many investigators…what he did was put everything together in a coherent framework…the same can be said for classical mechanics and Newton, as well as quantum mechanics in the 20’th century…

    Chapter 39 in the Serway text is devoted to relativity…[as it is in every general physics text…]

    Here, in the introduction, it is explained how the insights gained by the revolutionary theory of electromagnetism was no longer compatible with Newtonian mechanics…

    It is important to recognize that Einstein was working on electromagnetism when he developed the special theory of relativity.

    He was convinced that Maxwell’s equations were correct, and to reconcile them with one of his postulates, he was forced into the revolutionary notion of assuming that space
    and time are not absolute.

    You seem completely ignorant of these important contextual aspects of how relativity arose, reducing your postulations to nothing but silly gibberish…

    Although Einstein made many other important contributions to science, the special theory of relativity alone represents one of the greatest intellectual achievements of all time.

    With this theory, experimental observations can be correctly predicted over the range of speeds from v = 0 to speeds approaching the speed of light. At low speeds, Einstein’s theory reduces to Newtonian mechanics as a limiting situation.

    There it is…exactly the thing Einstein contributed…the ability to PREDICT physical outcomes based on the theoretical framework he articulated, showing us how things actually work…

    It is quite obvious that you simply lack even basic understanding of physics, which is why you are unable to understand the meaning of Einstein’s contribution…just as others here who have shown a lack of understanding of flight and cannot understand how real flying machines came about…

    • LOL: Iris
    • Replies: @Jean-Marie L
    , @annamaria
  310. Robjil says:
    @Ultrafart the Brave

    Here is a good article about the Sassoons and other criminal Jewish families/groups who destroyed China is the 19th century by selling opium to the masses. It is very possible with this much power in China that these Jewish criminal groups would be also involved in trafficking of Chinese slave workers to other nations.

    https://parsikhabar.net/news/the-dragon-awakens/18572/

  311. @another anon

    Sorry not to be more specific about dates, I’m just recalling from memory.

    A group of Einstein supporters wrote a paper to prove (or authoritatively state) that Hilbert got the field equations from Einstein rather than the reverse; and around that time something odd happened with the only extant proof of Hilbert’s article, which was kept in an Austrian or German library. A number of sentences and/or formulae had been cut out from it. This way, it was impossible to compare Hilbert’s equations to the ones Einstein published.

    On the other hand, something interesting about special relativity is the way Einstein narrated how he got the intuitive conviction that the aether could not be a correct theory, and so he came up with his mind experiment of a little man riding a light beam, without any knowledge of the Michelson-Morley experiment. In actual fact, correspondance with his wife revealed that, at the time of the Michelson-Morley experiment, he was avidly following scientific news and in particular what the outcome of the experiment would say about aether theory. The tale he spun does not make sense anyway. Someone with a scientific mind would have been curious of the implications of the aether hypothesis being false and could have tried to work out mathematics that accounted for an aether-less universe with a frame-independent light speed constant. But forming an absolute conviction from what has to be preternatural intuition rather than the examination of evidence sounds a bit fishy.

    • Replies: @Iris
  312. @another anon

    No shyness here, just an assumption of political literacy on the part of readers. Now, who’s the USA’s partner in crime on the international scene?

    Can’t very well be Russia or China.

    If you said Uzbekistan, try again.

  313. Iris says:
    @gaston julia

    Does the Nobel prize for discovery of the law of the photoelectric effect qualify?

    The Photoelectric Effect was discovered by Hertz circa 1885, with findings further expanded by Hallwachs and Branly.

    By 1900, Planck had already discovered and presented his Constant, establishing the particulate nature of energy and bringing about a foremost change of paradigm in Physics, representing de facto the birth of Quantum Physics.

    By 1902, Hertz’s student Lenard had completed and published all the experimental results necessary to establish the laws of photoelectric effect: extraction of electrons by UV rays, in numbers proportional to ray intensity, with kinetic energy independent of ray intensity but increasing with wave frequency.

    Einstein enthusiastically reviewed Lenard work and praised his discoveries in a letter to Mileva Maric. He wrote his 1905 article in line with Planck’s core discovery, suggesting that the light could have a finite (quantum) aspect.

    His suggestion was not entirely correct, neither complete: Louis de Broglie later proved that light is also a wave, while Quantum Physics undisputedly owes most to Schrodinger, who formalised its equations. (Schrodinger succeeded Max Planck at the Berlin University).

    In the thrilling and beautiful story of the birth of a new branch of Physics, the Quantum Theory, Einstein played a secondary role when compared to the ground-breaking inputs from Planck and from Schrodinger. His results were partial, and De Broglie deserves at least as much credit.

    All this, not even considering that the later public disputes between Niels Bohr and Einstein about Quantum Physics ended with Bohr to be correct over Einstein.

    The details of this story certainly do not make Einstein look like the absolute all-time genius he is purported to be, but like somebody who was prompt to appropriate and build on work produced by others, and who had very good PR backing him.

    • Thanks: Vojkan, annamaria
  314. And, of course, on top of it, the US government and corrupt media accuse everyone else of doing just what they’re doing themselves.
    Remember Chekov in Star Trek always claiming something was invented in Russia? They should have given those lines to one of the Americans…

  315. @SafeNow

    But you’re only mid-pack because of your White Male Privilege.
    Only because you’re a white male, you’ve been able to devote so much time to playing a game and learning to do it well while the People of Color and women were forced to work and fight off all your racism and misogyny.
    It is therefore clear that you wouldn’t be winning the games you’re winning if they were fair games (players of color and female players starting with 5 extra queens to make up for your privilege).
    It is therefore clear to anyone (or at least any card-carrying member of the insane wing of the Demonrat Party) that you’re really at the low end of the pack.

  316. Iris says:
    @Jean-Marie L

    A group of Einstein supporters wrote a paper to prove (or authoritatively state) that Hilbert got the field equations from Einstein rather than the reverse; and around that time something odd happened with the only extant proof of Hilbert’s article, which was kept in an Austrian or German library. A number of sentences and/or formulae had been cut out from it. This way, it was impossible to compare Hilbert’s equations to the ones Einstein published.

    Correct. This deliberate act of fraud to sustain the Einstein myth was reported by Professor Friedwardt Winterberg, commenting about this article:
    Belated Decision in the Hilbert-Einstein Priority Dispute“, published by L. Corry, J. Renn, and J. Stachel

    Winterberg pointed out that it was generally accepted that David Hilbert had developed the theory of Generalized Relativity at least five days before Einstein, until the publication of Corry et All’s article in 1997.

    Their publication, which referred to the proofs of Hilbert’s article archived in the library of Goettingen, claimed that it had in fact been inspired by Einstein!

    Pr Winterberg checked and realized that Hilbert’s priginal article had been mutilated (a third of a page was cut with a knife), to remove an essential passage. F. Winterberg however proved that Hilbert’s original article did understand the whole theory and that Einstein had been aware of it for several weeks when he published his own.

    Corry and his co-authors, who were thus exposed, later admitted that Hilbert’s equations were “correct”, while insisting that they were not “explicit”. It is true that the explanation in question was precisely in the passage which was torn out….

    Pr Winterberg’s article:
    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/276345765_On_Belated_Decision_in_the_Hilbert-Einstein_Priority_Dispute_published_by_L_Corry_J_Renn_and_J_Stachel

    • Thanks: annamaria, Jean-Marie L
  317. @brabantian

    If nuclear bombs aren’t real, care to explain why nuclear power plants (same principle) work? And why they do leave devastation similar to alleged nuclear bombs if they blow up?
    Or are nuclear power plants a hoax too? Then where does our electricity really come from?

    • Replies: @Johnny Walker Read
  318. FB says: • Website
    @chuckywiz

    E=mC2. It is just a theory, there is no use of it yet.

    That’s completely UNTRUE…

    We would not have satellite positioning systems [like GPS and the Russian Glonass system] if it weren’t for Einstein and his relativity math…you use it every day and have it in your phone…

    Consider the idea that two clocks moving relative to each other will not tell the same time…crazy…?

    Not at all, and it was proved in a 1971 experiment with an atomic clock flying around the world on a jet aircraft, while an identical atomic clock remained in the laboratory…when the traveling clock returned, it was exactly 200 nanoseconds slower than the stationary clock, exactly as predicted by relativity…

    Considering that positioning sats fly around the globe much faster than any airplane, and that their principle of operation is to triangulate radio signals from at least three or more sats in order to fix a geographical position of a radio receiver like a phone on the ground, it becomes obvious just how necessary Einstein’s relativity math really is…

    The same principle is at work in the inertial navigation systems used in aircraft and missiles…it is also used in nuclear power generation and many other important applications…

    I mentioned Maxwell and electromagnetism earlier…he had found that the speed of light must be a certain fixed value, namely 3 x 10^8 meters per second…but this could only be true if this speed was in fact CONSTANT…always true in all reference frames…

    That is to say that Maxwell’s findings could NOT be correct in the Galilean relativity that was understood to be the case at that time…

    Albert Einstein’s central insight in formulating special relativity was that, for full consistency with electromagnetism, mechanics must also be revised such that Lorentz invariance replaces Galilean invariance.

    At the low relative velocities characteristic of everyday life, Lorentz invariance and Galilean invariance are nearly the same, but for relative velocities close to that of light they are very different.

    For electromagnetism to be right, we had to have a new understanding of the idea of TIME, which was not immutable…as proved by the atomic clock experiment…

    Einstein solved the problem that said our then understanding of relativity simply didn’t apply to electromagnetism…it would mean abandoning the concept of relativity completely…that would be an incredible roadblock to any further advance in knowledge…in a nutshell, either Maxwell was wrong, or our understanding of relativity was wrong…

    A NEW understanding of space and time was required…that’s what Einstein formulated…

    Of course this is huge…it is really quite silly to now go and make these kinds of assertions that it’s not…

    • Replies: @chuckywiz
    , @Fox
  319. @Iris

    It’s interesting how this Nobel prize, which was awarded to Einstein for describing an experiment to prove that photoelectric emission involves the action of light quanta, is usually presented.

    Some will say Einstein discovered the photo-electric effect.

    Some will say he discovered the wave-particle duality.

    In fact, he did neither, but applied Plank’s established theory of light being emitted in quanta to explain the intensity of the photo-electric current as a function of light frequency.

    It is worth noticing that he received the Nobel prize for a simple experiment description; so, basically, a conjecture. If it had been proved by the time the prize was awarded, then why didn’t the experiment implementer share the prize? If it hadn’t, then this wasn’t a proper result and hardly worth a Nobel prize. And from what you describe about Lenard’s work, Einstein’s contribution may have been even flimsier than I thought: he used Plank’s theory to explain Lenard’s quantitative results, and presented this as a breakthrough experiment to be carried out.

    It is also worth noticing that he wasn’t awarded a Nobel prize for any relativity work, no doubt to avoid raising embarrassing paternity questions, and inevitably having to share the prize with at least Hilbert, if not with many more physicists.

    • Thanks: annamaria
    • Replies: @Iris
    , @Vojkan
  320. jiri says:

    “which do you think they might choose?”

    They will choose what they always choose but this time they will not get away with it.

  321. Iris says:
    @Jean-Marie L

    It is also worth noticing that he wasn’t awarded a Nobel prize for any relativity work, no doubt to avoid raising embarrassing paternity questions, and inevitably having to share the prize with at least Hilbert, if not with many more physicists.

    This is a very pertinent remark and worth repeating: there is a very good reason why the Nobel committee, at a time they still showed basic decency, never gave Einstein the Nobel prize for the ground-breaking Relativity Theory. The reason is because it was not his, and the Committe was well aware of that.

    Furthermore, Einstein was actually attributed the 1921 Phyics Nobel Prize in Nov 1922, a year later, because in 1921, the Committe decided that no Physics work recently produced was good enough to fulfil the brief in Nobel’s will. Remembering that Einstein’s photoelectric effect article had come out long before in 1905, this suggests its relative importance was not the “genius” finding we are told it was.

    • Replies: @anonimo11
  322. chuckywiz says:
    @FB

    GPS would not be here had it not been for the Quantum Mechanics which Einstein denied. And in the equation E=mC2 I dont see any application of theory of relativity. E stands for energy in whatever units, m stands for mass (variable) and C speed of light (a constant according to most of the scientist, now new information is being developed about varying speed of light).

    According to this equation, One pound of horse shite could produce so much energy. Does anyone believe it? It is just a theory and the morons are giving Noble peace prizes on such theories. The scientist are like historians who copy each others (laziness or a fashion) and repeat the same story with a simple twist.

    Where is the GPS business in E=mC2 equation. Unless I am missing something.
    We have a herd mentality. When the scientist agree on certain theory so it becomes a solid and fashionable fact. Remember the story “The king has no clothes”.

    As for winning the Nobel Prize, Look some of the recent recipients, Saint Obama (peace), Mala (the girl from Pakistan, peace), Eli Wiesel the Holocaust Fraud (peace, this guy put full page ad in NYT to bomb Iran while having a Noble Peace), Martin Luther King, Yaser Arafat, Several Israeli Prime minister (war criminals) on and on. This is elites game.

    An Indian inventor came up with the idea of Transistor. He was denied the Noble Prize because in those days “India was not ready” for Noble peace prize

    • Replies: @FB
  323. anonimo11 says:
    @Iris

    Interesting, and certainly consistent with all the facts. No doubt there have been, even in physics alone, many similar cases. Just look at last year’s Nobels, where the third discoverers of planets won the prize, but not the first, second, or fourth.

  324. Saggy says: • Website
    @Wizard of Oz

    Since you invited a response I’ll respond – your points 1,2 and 3 are just drivel, hypothetical nonsense, which indicate that you have not studied the matter seriously or are a shill. Since you bring up obscure incidentals like Madagascar I figure you’re probably a shill. Of course I could be wrong, the indoctrination in the hoax is so strong that otherwise rational people become idiots on the subject. If you’re not a shill then study the facts on http://www.holohoax101.org to understand the hoax. Formulating and asking hypothetical questions doesn’t help. You have to aggressively study the hoax yourself to overcome the propaganda.

    • Agree: annamaria
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  325. FB says: • Website
    @chuckywiz

    Look, I only have so much time and patience for an illiterate boob…

    You obviously know absolutely nothing about either physics or even the world around your silly ass, based on your diarrhea eruptions here…

    The Global Positioning System can be considered a continuously operating experiment in both special and general relativity.

    The in-orbit clocks are corrected for both special and general relativistic time dilation effects as described above, so that (as observed from the earth’s surface) they run at the same rate as clocks on the surface of the Earth.

    The GPS and other satnav systems have NOTHING to do with quantum mechanics, which is the study of quanta, ie very small, elemental particles…it is also widely considered an INCOMPLETE science…

    The use of Einstein’s math to correctly calculate things like GPS or any satellite motion is an established fact…

    Time dilation explains why two working clocks will report different times after different accelerations. For example, at the ISS time goes slower, lagging approximately 0.01 seconds behind for every 12 earth months passed.

    For GPS satellites to work, they must adjust for similar bending of spacetime to coordinate properly with systems on Earth.

    The Soyuz TMA at the International Space Station

    These predictions of the theory of relativity have been repeatedly confirmed by experiment, and they are of practical concern, for instance in the operation of satellite navigation systems such as GPS and Galileo.

    Someone traveling at very high speed, such as aboard the orbiting space station, which has a speed of about eight kilometers per second, will actually age less than a person on earth, even though the difference is very small, due to the quite small speed even of an orbiting satellite, compared to the speed of light…

    The cosmonauts Sergei Krikalev and Sergei Avdeyev both experienced time dilation of about 20 milliseconds compared to time that passed on Earth.

    Btw fool, a ‘pound’ is not a measure of mass…it would be a SLUG of manure in your idiotic example…

    • Replies: @mikemikev
    , @chuckywiz
    , @Jazman
  326. @Ann Nonny Mouse

    As I see the Chinese Communist Party’s theft of American intellectual property rights using mental intuition and spiritual intuition, the Chinese Communist Party is being divinely used to get rid of the Babylonian Slave States’ karma of plagiarism.

    If anyone wonders where I got the understanding from, it’s as follows:

    * “Fei Tian College Lecture on Classical Chinese Dance” by Li Hongzhi (which can be found at the following website: https://www.falundafa.org/eng/falun-dafa-recent-writings.html)

    * “How The USA Became a Babylonian Slave State” by Benjamin Fulford (Website: https://stillnessinthestorm.com/2020/07/benjamin-fulford-july-13th-2020-summer-break-edition-how-the-usa-became-a-babylonian-slave-state/)

    * Discover your Psychic Type by Sherrie Dillard (a book about the mental, spiritual, emotional, and physical types of intuition)

  327. S says:
    @Larry Romanoff

    I wrote that only one Canadian website made even a passing reference to the fact that those Chinese laborers had been kidnapped by slave traders. You asked for the reference and I provided it. There were indeed millions of Chinese kidnapped; Hence my comment, “That’s why there are Chinese all over the world.”

    You might find the link below of some interest.

    It excerpts an article from a now defunct website on the Nourse Line, a 19th and early 20th century London based shipping firm which came to specialize in transporting wage slaves (ie so called ‘cheap labor’) around the globe.

    I have sometimes wondered if a primary unspoken ulterior motive of the drugging of China, and then its being militarily crushed in the two Opium Wars, was for the specific purpose of ‘opening up’ China’ huge population to enmasse predation as wage slaves, ie so called ‘cheap labor’.

    “..The terms of contract were that they agreed to work for a defined number of years, five, in one of the colonies and in return they earned return passage but were paid extremely low wages, but, perhaps more importantly, were fed and housed. The Chinese Coolies were employed under exactly the same terms and it should come as no surprise to anyone that this form of indentured labour explains why the Indians and Chinese populate virtually every country in the world.”

    https://majorityrights.com/weblog/comments/a_virtual_round_the_world_voyage

    • Thanks: Iris
  328. mikemikev says:
    @FB

    Didn’t Lorentz come up with time dilation though?

    • Replies: @FB
  329. Still on the general topic of historical frauds, and since several have raised the matter, I have a curiosity about the Apollo moon landing.

    A few years back, China put a satellite into controlled orbit around the moon and photographed every square centimeter of the surface. Many of the photos were published but the one photo everyone was waiting for – the shots of the Apollo landing site and of the debris field and the US flag, was nowhere to be seen.

    It’s possible the photo resolution was too low to pick up a flag, but it didn’t appear that way from some of the other photos, so the question is why.

    The satellite either located and photographed the flag or it didn’t. If it did, why not publish it? And if there were no flag or landing site, why not say so?

    I have no answer, only a question.

    • Replies: @Iris
    , @Bombercommand
    , @Iris
    , @FB
  330. S says:
    @Larry Romanoff

    If I may suggest, the more important concern is not the absolute number of persons but the method and terms of their transition to North America and why the entire Canadian and American media, historical, publishing, and educational systems, have buried these facts.

    The intention (at least) to import tens of millions of Chinese wage slaves (ie so called ‘cheap labor’) into Canada, Australia, and the United States, through the latter half of the 19th century, completely displacing their Anglo-Saxonish populations, was very much there. To the extent they failed at the time, it wasn’t for lack of trying.

    Elements of the corporate mass media were attempting to condition people to accept it as a given, such as in a couple of examples below.

    One Hundred Years Progress of the United States (1870) – pg 511 – 515

    ‘The Chinese question, viz., whether the Chinese and other oriental nations shall be allowed to swarm into our territory and take the place of our present laboring classes…’

    ‘We say it [‘the Chinese problem’] is in one sense already solved, because it is evident that we can not, if we would, keep them [the Chinese] out…’

    ‘Regarding this point as settled, and believing as we do that before 1880 we shall have 5,000,000 of Chinese on this continent, and before 1900, 20,000,000 or 25,000,000…’

    The New Rome (1853) – pg 98

    ‘..the day will not be far distant when America will number more Chinese than Caucasians.’

    ‘From these relations we may calculate upon an emigration of American businessmen to China, in return for that of Chinese laborers to California.’

    https://majorityrights.com/weblog/comments/crimes_that_our_grandchildren_will_see#c59719

    https://majorityrights.com/weblog/comments/the_new_rome_or_the_united_states_of_the_world_1853#c90697

  331. @jiri

    I think you will find that no unz.com link can be posted to Facebook as explained by Ron Unz in one or more of his Announcements.

  332. vot tak says:

    The early aviation discussion in the article and comments has been enjoyable to read. For those interested in seeing replicas of these early aircraft flying about, I recomend a 1960’s film called “Those Magnificent Men and Their Flying Machines”. The plot of the film is complete crap, but the visuals of the replicas of those early planes is well done.

  333. @FB

    Einstein is visibly one of your heroes; but it’s hard to find a single argument to vindicate his personal contributions in this heap of red herrings.

  334. S says:

    The plans to import tens of millions of Chinese wage slaves by diktat into the US, Canada, and Australia, ultimately fell through with the Chinese Exclusion Act (circa 1881) in the United States, and the ‘White Only’ policy (circa 1900) in Australia.

    As much lamented by the Pall Mall Gazette of London in 1874, excerpted and linked to below, the big problem the promoters of this global scheme were running into was race. The historic slave dealers of the Anglosphere (ie powerful elements and hangers on of the Anglo-Saxon and Jewish people’s) were not going to have given up the lucrative profits of chattel slavery and it’s trade, for the expected far greater riches of the cheap labor/mass immigration system, ie wage slavery*, only to have the entire plan blow up in their faces, as was indeed happenimg.

    They were not going to give up their profits.

    It would be over a hundred years yet before they would develop the perfect ideology to make the world safe for so called ‘cheap labor’.

    They would give this ideological vehicle (along with it’s integral anti-race campaign, euphamistically called ‘anti-racism’) the name ‘Multi-Culturalism’.

    Pall Mall Gazette (1874) – Chinamen Out of China

    “A dread of what might happen if capitalists could command and control these vast hordes of workmen as against men of their own race, has made the labouring class, at any rate, blind to their good qualities.”

    *The California State Legislature in 1876 determined that the Chinese being imported in there at the time were often being paid only about a third of whatever the prevailing local rate(s) for the labor they were performing normally was.

    https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=chi.55223460&view=1up&seq=136&skin=mobile

    • Replies: @S
  335. @Saggy

    Your non responsive reply is diagnostic. It amounts to no more than “I disregard your comments as not worth replying to and suggest you get the complete picture from my blog”. As it happens I did get immersed in your blog for quite a while and, since I didn’t find answers to my pointss (2. and 3. – my point 1. being merely an observation you might have cared to comment on) I posed the points directly to you.

    When I say “diagnostic” I mean that you have shown deficiency of intellect.A small symptom is that you do not appear to understand the meaning of “hypothetical. My propositions are not hypothetical questions. Why did the Nazis ship all those women and children and old people to Poland when there was no prospect of its being just on the way to somewhere else (Madagascar was, you surely know, one of the destinations fantasized for Europe’s Jews before the Final Solutiion)?

    And is it really credible that, if there were many thousands of Jewish survivors of the camps in Poland not one would be greedy enough to take money for *telling the truth*?

    • Replies: @Saggy
  336. @Larry Romanoff

    Trolling may amuse you but pulling the reader’s leg with all that Rothschild BS is a bit insulting. It’s a reminder that one is in the company of quite a few UR readers who have no nose for the phony quote and swallow the Rothschild nonsense wholesale. Mayer Amschel Rothschild was under 40 and just getting off the ground in business in Frankfurt and his son who became seriously rich in London after 1805, Nathan, was only 14 in 1791. The older brother was 18.

    I recall an interview I read in which you and a bloke in Canberra bandied round “Rothschild/Baring” as if it was some joint banking enterprise! Maybe it was just him and you were humouring him but really….. the Barings were Christians who started banking in London 70 or 80 years before Nathan Rothschild.

    • Replies: @Iris
  337. Thomasina says:
    @A Competent Physicist

    James Clerk Maxwell studied the papers of Michael Faraday and recognized the “math” in them.

    “Although Faraday received little formal education, he was one of the most influential scientists in history. It was by his research on the magnetic field around a conductor carrying a direct current that Faraday established the basis for the concept of the electromagnetic field in physics. Faraday also established that magnetism could affect rays of light and that there was an underlying relationship between the two phenomena.[1][2] He similarly discovered the principles of electromagnetic induction and diamagnetism, and the laws of electrolysis. His inventions of electromagnetic rotary devices formed the foundation of electric motor technology, and it was largely due to his efforts that electricity became practical for use in technology.

    Faraday was an excellent experimentalist who conveyed his ideas in clear and simple language; his mathematical abilities, however, did not extend as far as trigonometry and were limited to the simplest algebra. James Clerk Maxwell took the work of Faraday and others and summarized it in a set of equations which is accepted as the basis of all modern theories of electromagnetic phenomena. On Faraday’s uses of lines of force, Maxwell wrote that they show Faraday “to have been in reality a mathematician of a very high order…”

    Albert Einstein kept a picture of Faraday on his study wall, alongside pictures of Isaac Newton and James Clerk Maxwell.”

    Faraday was self-taught. Amazing, really. He received no higher education as his family was poor. Imagine what might have happened if he had had the math.

    • Thanks: Iris
  338. Vojkan says:
    @Jean-Marie L

    The best summary of Einstein’s “genius”. Thank you.

  339. Vojkan says:
    @mark green

    “Whereas Ann Frank personifies Jewish innocence, Einstein is the manifestation of Jewish intellectual preeminence.”

    Based on those two examples, some petty-minded goyim might infer that they are the manifestation of the unique Jewish genius for counterfeiting and plagiarism.

  340. GeeBee says:
    @GeeBee

    Just a quick correction to a strange mistake that I cannot understand how I came to make. In the video of the young princesses Elizabeth and Margaret making the ‘Nazi salute’, I somehow described the Duchess of York as their aunt. She was, of course, their mother.

  341. georg1945 says:
    @Svevlad

    A másik nemzet a MAGYAR ! A KERESZTÉNY MAGYAR !

  342. Iris says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    pulling the reader’s leg with all that Rothschild BS is a bit insulting.

    The ones really “pulling the leg” of the public and treating them like retards are the media and academia shielding the Rothschild and the banking dynasties from scrutiny.

    In 2007, Chinese economist and academic Song Hongbing published a book entitled “Currency Wars” on the subject of covert Rothschild political take-over by the imposition of private central banking

    The book was a great best-seller in China, with millions of readers, including senior members of government and business leaders. The book gained resurgence in 2009, as it correctly predicted the 2008 financial crisis.

    The core idea of this book is that Western countries are run by a group of private banks that have taken control of state-owned central banks

    The book goes back to the Battle of Waterloo to tell how a small group of European bankers, with the Rothschild family on the front line, gradually took control of the central banks of the United Kingdom, the rest of Europe and then the United States. By mastering finance, they played a leading role in modern history, whether during the American Civil War, the two world wars, the 1929 crisis, or the fall of the Soviet Union. More recently, the Japanese recession of the 1990s and the Asian crisis of 1997 are also attributed to the actions of these occult bankers. According to Song, these bankers would try to subject the economy — and especially the Chinese economy — to their dictates in order to retain financial power.

    The book is of particular interest to Americans, as it examines in detail how the Federal Reserve was forced into being, by the assassination, assassination attempts or” unexplained” deaths of US Presidents who opposed its private character.

    Despite being so focused on the US, and translated to many foreign languages, “Currency Wars” was never translated to English and is never reviewed, nor even mentioned in Anglo-Saxon media. That speaks volume about the Rothschild’s alleged “impotence” you are trying to cover.

    • Thanks: CBTerry, Robjil
    • Replies: @Rdm
    , @Robjil
  343. 348.Wizard of Oz says:

    “Trolling may amuse you but pulling the reader’s leg with all that Rothschild BS is a bit insulting. Mayer Amschel Rothschild was under 40 and just getting off the ground in business in Frankfurt . . . in 1791.”

    Mayer Amschel Rothschild was born in Frankfurt in 1744. That would make him 47 years old in 1791, old enough to start a bank in the US, and he was far from “just getting off the ground in business” by that date. And yes, Rothschild did establish the first privately-owned FED in the US in 1791.

    “Congress established the First Bank of the United States, headquartered in Philadelphia, in 1791. It was the largest corporation in the country and was dominated by “big banking and money interests”.”

    https://www.federalreserveeducation.org/about-the-fed/history

    “I recall an interview I read in which you and a bloke in Canberra bandied round “Rothschild / Baring” as if it was some joint banking enterprise!”

    I have never had an interview with any “bloke from Canberra”. And yes, Rothschild/Baring was a joint banking enterprise, certainly for financing the international slave trade, the Baring brothers being great Christians as you said.

    It seems trolling may amuse you as well.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  344. Iris says:
    @Larry Romanoff

    The satellite either located and photographed the flag or it didn’t. If it did, why not publish it? And if there were no flag or landing site, why not say so?

    A flag is an unprotected piece of material that could never resist years of Moon’s “weather” erosion: winds, solar radiation, etc.. Not finding the flag is not a proof that it was never there in the first place.

    What was used as a “proof” was retroreflectors, but they can be put by unmanned missions.

    The first unmanned mission to reach the Moon was the Soviet-made robotic rovers sent as part of the Lunokhod program (1969-1977).
    The rovers were equiped with retroreflectors, which allowed to detect their position by lunar laser ranging experiment ( laser pulses sent from Earth and reflected by the retroreflectors allow to calculate the distance the rover is relative to Earth).

    The Lunokhod retroreflectors have been independently detected by US and French labs, and their position is still followed-up to the day.

    • Replies: @Olivier1973
    , @Olivier1973
  345. @Larry Romanoff

    Assuming what you say is true, the answer to your question is not that Americans faked the Moon Landing. The Chinese male is at his core mentally ill, in a frothing rage 24/7 against “White Man”, and is hamfisted at propaganda. To show the flag of The United States of America on the Moon would remind the world of White American achievement, and that is intolerable to the Chinese male brain. The Chinese eagerly participate on the new jewish propaganda line “America Bad America Stupid America Finished”. A similar treatment of Apollo 11 is seen in that recent film, where a half-assed Canadian actor plays Neil Armstrong, one of the best test pilots ever, but totally humble, so a perfect choice to command Apollo 11 and be the first human to walk the Moon, and the flag of The United States of America is never shown. The Chinese should have shown the Tranquility Base photos, congratulated America, and gifted a nice color blowup to the American government, instead they had to act like a typical Angry Asian Male. The Chinese would have been overjoyed to show a photo of the Moon landing site and point out ” Lookee, lookee, White Man was never there!!!”. But they can’t.

    • Agree: ivan
    • Replies: @vot tak
  346. Prajna says: • Website
    @Auntie Analogue

    …and to this day every aircraft since the Wrights’ Flyer has incorporated control systems over all three axes of flight.

    Actually, I have flown 2 axis control aircraft, the pterodactyl traveller microlight (ultralight) for instance, uses yaw induced roll. Also many model aircraft use single axis, rudder only, control quite safely.

    • Agree: FB
  347. Iris says:
    @Larry Romanoff

    Still on the general topic of historical frauds, and since several have raised the matter, I have a curiosity about the Apollo moon landing.

    The best evidence that the “Moon Landings” never happened are Physics and technology-related; most are proposed by Russian scientists, with Russia being the undisputed leading country in space engineering.

    A simple proof, easy to understand by scientists and layman alike, is that of the impossible trajectory of Apollo 11.

    Footage of Apollo 11’s ascent to outer space provided by NASA and the media is made of separate sections of films, but there exist uninterrupted footage by amateurs which provide a different insight of what really happened.

    A Super-8 film shot by NASA contractor Philip Pollacia filmed the Apollo 11 launch continuously during the first 170 seconds of the launch.

    As per NASA’s official post-flight trajectory, the Apollo 11 rocket should have reached an altitude of 25 kms at second 107 of the flight, high enough to escape gravity and join outer space.

    However, in Pollacia’s unedited film, the rocket is shown crossing a layer of clouds and projecting its shadow on it at second 107.

    Upper layers of clouds are located at an altitude of about 26,000 feet (8 kms), as anybody who ever boarded a commercial plane have verified by themselves.
    So the unedited footage proves that at time 107 second, the rocket had actually accomplished only 1/3 of its official trajectory, 8km instead of 25, while having already used 60% of its fuel.

    The Apollo 11 rocket could have never escaped Earth atmosphere,; it would have ended in the North Atlantic Ocean.

    • Replies: @anonimo11
  348. chuckywiz says:
    @FB

    You did not answer the basic question? Einstein. What relativity has to do with E=mC2
    Explain? Dont waste your time on throwing names and pictures. This old stuff. How about answering the real question?

    I am proud to be a fool, because I question if I dont understand rather than drinking Kool aid. Give me some new information, I will change my mind.
    As far your exemplary example of mass and weight difference I am overwhelmed and humbled. I learned that stuff in primary school, sorry just forgot.

    Again E=mC2
    One pound of horse shit will not give you lot of energy. Try it in your back yard if you believe in your hero. Again it is just a theory. God is woman that is my theory. Prove it otherwise. Dont be A legend in your own mind.

    As far your compliments. I appreciate it very much and suggest that YOU continue to molest sheep and goats in your spare time rather learn new things. Be careful, it is a crime in some states.

    I know your kind very well. Travel around the world you may pick up a few things here and there.

    • Agree: annamaria
    • Replies: @FB
  349. @FB

    If a rudder alone is adequate for SAFE turns and maneuvering such as a figure 8, why bother with ailerons at all? There is zero evidence that any of the Europeans used ailerons/wing warping or anything like it before the Wright Flyer demonstration in France in August 1908. After that they all rushed to copy the Wrights. Clearly the Wrights solved a serious problem none of the hundreds of Europeans had been able to solve, NOR EVEN UNDERSTOOD WAS A PROBLEM. That was the brillance of the Wrights, from the begining they understood controlled flight was the only important technical problem. The story is they observed hawks through binoculars for months and got the idea of wing warping from these noble birds. I can find no evidence that the European designs, prior to the Wrights turned and maneuvered. None of them were so bold as to claim making turns, but through arch insinuation after the fact, modern accounts sometimes try to imply it. Generally the strategem is to ignore the issue.

    • Replies: @vot tak
  350. @Stop Clinton and Bush

    As I’m sure you know, there were two totally different design types of nukes supposedly dropped on Japan during the second world war. The first bomb dropped on Hiroshima was a “gun type”. This bomb was supposedly so simple in design it was never even tested before it was dropped. It was a 13 kiloton weapon(known as “Little Boy”) and was able to totally destroy Hiroshima

    Gun-type design (HEU)

    This is the “simplest” type of nuclear explosive and was detonated over the city of Hiroshima by the United States in World War II. The design uses highly enriched uranium (HEU) as fissile material, which is obtained by concentrating atoms of the rare U-235 isotope. When uranium is extracted from the ground, less than 1 percent of the ore is U-235. 99.3 percent is the heavier U-238 isotope, which cannot sustain a chain reaction of nuclear fission.

    “As the bomb fell over Hiroshima and exploded, we saw an entire city disappear. I wrote in my log the words: “My God, what have we done?”
    Robert Lewis, pilot of the plane that dropped the ‘Little Boy’ bomb, April 1947

    The second type of bomb, supposedly dropped on Nagasaki was an implosion type bomb device. It was a 21 kiloton weapon known as “Fat Man”. Again, the city was totally destroyed.

    Implosion design (plutonium or HEU)

    The world’s first nuclear explosion was an implosion device that used plutonium for fissile material. The Manhattan Project scientists who designed the device dubbed it the “gadget”. It was detonated successfully on 16 July 1945 near Alamagordo, New Mexico, in what was called the Trinity test. A weapon of the same design was used a few weeks later in the attack on Nagasaki, Japan, on 9 August 1945.

    A 5.3 kg ring of weapons-grade plutonium, enough for one bomb core.
    Unlike uranium, plutonium does not occur naturally on Earth; it must be created in a nuclear reactor. It is a byproduct of all power reactors, but in order to be used as fissile material, it must be chemically separated from the rest of the highly radioactive waste. This is a costly and hazardous process requiring specialized knowledge, facilities, and equipment. It is thus highly improbable that terrorist organizations would learn to master this technique and more likely that they would steal the plutonium.

    My question, if a gun type nuke is so easy to make, and uses highly enriched uranium (HEU) as fissile material(which can be found on the black market), why is it that every country on the planet would not have a stockpile of these weapons, and why have no nukes been used since WWII.

    The gun-type weapon is produced through a rather simple process in which one mass of U-235 is ‘shot’ into another by conventional explosives, creating a critical mass. The impact generates more neutrons, ensuring a fission chain reaction.The gun-type nuclear explosion is the most inefficient in terms of burning up the fissile material; only about 1.4 percent of the HEU in the Hiroshima bomb actually fissioned.

    Yet a large amount of fissile material is required to ensure that a nuclear chain reaction will take place. Therefore, gun-type weapons will necessarily be heavier and bulkier than other types of nuclear weapons. While this suggests that States seeking strategic nuclear weapons would look to more advanced designs, the simplicity of a gun-type device may be attractive to terrorists. A weapon of this type is too large to be mounted on a long-range missile, but it could be dropped from a plane or delivered in a truck or a shipping container.

    https://www.ctbto.org/nuclear-testing/types-of-nuclear-weapons/

    https://i.insider.com/568d6a51dd0895af3d8b466c?width=2075

    • Replies: @Sya Beerens
  351. Very interesting story. I looked at bibliography so I went to Veterans Today. This VT has dozens of images of Trump as the worst madman around. VT has evolved into a radical left site just like MM who exist to hate Trump.

    I truly was STUNNED to see the cover page of this VT site. I couldn’t trust any publication that has the front page artwork and propaganda of VT. VT looks worse than the National Enquirer.

    I will vote for the person who will save the USA from the radical leftist morons (of truly mediocre IQ) who would come to power.
    I want to remember history-the men who fought the Japanese and others, the men who built America and gave us democracy, built canals, dams, massive buildings, hydroelectric power stations,used quantum physics to make amazing communication devices, and so much more.
    Every day I am grateful that we have showers and flush toilets.

    I don’t want to be governed by thought police.
    I will now get to reading the Comments section.

  352. 339.S says:

    “That’s why there are Chinese all over the world.”

    I did note your successive posts, and I thank you for taking the time.

    • Replies: @S
  353. annamaria says:
    @FB

    Have you ever written a scientific paper? Have you heard about the obligatory Bibliography section? If you present important ideas without referencing the predecessors (in A. E., the authors of the ideas) you will be considered a plagiarizer. And this is exactly what has happened to A. Einstein; he pretended that there were neither Lorenz transforms nor seminal works by Poincare and Hilbert. Even the famous formula that has been appropriated by the enterprising A. E. was produced by another person, De Pretto. Your post was from the category “see the squirrel.”

    http://www.hugequestions.com/Eric/TFC/FromOthers/Einstein-master-plagiariser.html

    • Agree: Iris
    • Thanks: chuckywiz
    • Replies: @Lost american
  354. @GeeBee

    You’re mixing your metaphors, so your blackwash fails: Truth be told, it’s becoming increasingly obvious that the “BadGuys” of WW2 (the Nazis) were, as far as that is possible, in fact the “Good Guys.”

    • Replies: @GeeBee
  355. Tadeo says:
    @Iris

    The panoramic images show parts of the static lander and the Yutu 2 (“jade rabbit”) rover, which is now exploring the landing site in Von Kármán crater.

    CLEP, which released the images, said in a statement: “Researchers completed the preliminary analysis of the lunar surface topography around the landing site based on the image taken by the landing camera.”

    In contrast with previous images from the landing site, the panoramic image has been colour-corrected by Chinese researchers to better reflect the colours we would see if we were standing there.

    Online commentators had pointed out that these earlier, unprocessed images made the lunar landscape look reddish – a far cry from the gunpowder grey landscapes familiar from other missions to the surface.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-46836047

    You can see the color corrected photos in the previous link and everything is grey. The only red to be seen is the Chinese flag

    • Replies: @Iris
  356. @gaston julia

    “I think if you were able to read and understand his work (say, on less “controversial” subjects, such as diffusion, or light quantization) you would certainly come away with a less extreme opinion. This “third rate patent clerk” stuff is really off the mark.”

    By “his work” on less controversial” subjects, do you mean the “work” which has yet to be demonstrated due to its insignificance as also plagiarized?

  357. S says:
    @S

    Many know from experience just how difficult it can be to make the change of heart necessary to cut back on the number of calories one consumes daily when dieting, and, also, just how so very easy it is engage in self deception in this endeavor, ie ‘cheat’, thus sabotaging one’s own efforts.

    How much more difficult within a society it must have been then to make the change of heart necessary to truly abolish slavery, and ‘cut back’ from the hundreds of millions (if not billions?) in today’s dollars being made annually from chattel slavery and it’s trade within the Anglosphere during the latter half of the 18th century, and how so very easy it would have been to engage in self deception, ie ‘cheat’, under cover of supposed ‘abolitionism’, with the introduction of wage slavery (ie so called ‘cheap labor’) during the early 19th century via the so called ‘cheap labor’/’mass immigration’ system?

    Just as we see someone who is cheating on their diet in reality being as overweight as ever, with plenty of tell tale signs, despite what the ‘dieter’ may be telling themselves and others, wouldn’t we likely see something something similar within a society cheating on it’s supposed ‘abolition’ of slavery?

    If in reality chattel slavery and it’s trade had been simply monetized, ie distilled to it’s financial essence, and profits maximized, and not ‘abolished’, as myself and others submit, this would mean those powerful people and hangers on who had been engaged in the sordid chattel slave business had not in truth changed, but remained at heart unreformed slavers.

    One would expect to see tell tale signs of this all over the place if this were the case.

    I’ve posted before on the 1851 London Times editorial, editorials which have long been seen as a mouthpiece for official British thought regarding policy, on the subject of the exodus of the Irish people to the United States as wage slaves (‘cheap labor’) and the then ongoing tour of Ireland being made by then US ambassador to the UK, Abbott Lawrence.

    Abbott Lawrence was the patriarch of the powerful Lawrence family of Massachusetts textile factory magnates, whom had financed during the 1840’s the construction of the planned industrial city of Lawrence ‘Immigrant City’, Mass. [Not coincidentally, it was the same Lawrence family which would finance the construction of it’s infamous sister city, the ‘abolitionist’ center of Lawrence, KS, during the mid 1850’s.]

    Almost certainly, some of the very same Irish Ambassador Lawrence would see on his tour, would soon be wage slaves (so called ‘cheap labor’) in Lawrence, Mass.

    The Times editorial, though written almost a full generation after slavery’s supposed ‘abolition’ within the Empire in 1834, describes the desired characteristics of the people to take the stout hearted Irish people’s place within Ireland to be that of being ‘more mixed’, ‘more docile, and, ‘which can submit to a master’.

    A person might say, ‘well, that was a long time ago, what about today?’

    Could the use today of the term ‘migrant stock’, as linked below by the UN, for the wage slaves, ie ‘the immigrants’, which they claim to care so much about, be another such tell tale sign of the unreformed slaving nature of those at the very top?

    ‘Stock’ is first and foremost defined as ‘merchandise’.

    https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/migration/data/estimates2/estimates15.asp

    https://www.lexico.com/definition/stock

    • Replies: @Ivan
  358. anonimo11 says:
    @Iris

    This, and other objections, could be easily validated using USSR radar and perhaps satellite data.

    • Replies: @Iris
  359. GeeBee says:
    @TheTrumanShow

    Which metaphors did I mix? And ‘blackwash’? I flatter myself that I can communicate as well as most in my mother tongue, but I fear I cannot get your meaning at all. What are you trying to say? And as for your point that the ‘villains’ of WWII turn out to be the ‘good guys’, that is precisely what I have always endeavoured to communicate.

  360. @Johnny Walker Read

    Because contrary to popular American belief, the rest of the planet IS sane.

    • LOL: Iris
  361. @Larry Romanoff

    My mistaking Mayer Amschel Rothschild’s date of birth and accordingly giving only an inadequate reason for denying that he was responsible for the creation of America’s first central bank is no excuse for your frivolous reply which notably fails to deal with the question of whether he had any part to play in the establishment or control of the bank. If you read the quite lengthy account of his business career in Wikipedia – hardly likely to fail to mention such an important contribution to financing the development of the new nation – you will not even find America mentioned.

  362. @Iris

    Yes, well, the question was whether any of Einstein’s contemporaries credited him with the discovery of anything, and I think this answers the question.

    I would only add is that he did explain the photoelectric effect, and that up to that point, light was assumed to be a wave carried by a “luminiferous ether”. The Michelson-Morley experiment was intended to test for the presence of an ether, but found none. Physics majors still perform this experiment as part of their laboratory coursework today.

  363. Ever tried Google Books instead of news sites?

    Everything there is to know is available online you can go back to 1400 AD and read the facts

    Time to start reading and stop lying

  364. What a gyp. I was hoping that Larry would include the faked moon landings. {sigh}

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  365. FB says: • Website
    @mikemikev

    Didn’t Lorentz come up with time dilation though?

    No, not in the sense of a USABLE theory…

    Let’s first understand what a ‘theory’ means in science…most laypeople think this means next to nothing, something like an ‘unproven assertion’…ie some kind of speculation…

    In fact nothing could be further from the truth…a physical ‘theory’ is in fact a complete mathematical explanation of how things actually work in the physical world…

    This means that you can actually PREDICT outcomes mathematically, for instance the motion of celestial bodies, or ordinary bodies like cars or airplanes, or how fast a speed a rocket must reach in order to attain orbit and fly around the earth…

    This is because actual physical LAWS arise from ‘theories’…Newton’s theories of motion have given us three basic laws of the mechanics of physical objects, without which our modern, engineering-based world would be utterly impossible…you could not build a building, nor an airplane, nor anything we take for granted without the math that allows us to design these things…

    That’s what a ‘theory’ is…it is the most powerful construct imaginable in science…it is only called a ‘theory’ because science is open-ended…ie scientists know that often things have been updated and advanced…but mostly this is simply fine-tuning of the laws and the underlying math that we already know from a coherent theory…

    Lorentz and others certainly brought forth various pieces of the understanding of modern relativity, but it was Einstein who put everything together…again, like Newton before him…he didn’t just come up with everything himself either, but he was the one who made sense of all of it…

    It is absolutely crazy to try to take down Einstein, because he is a scientific figure of a stature like Newton…every real scientist knows this…those who make silly noises here are not scientists of any kind…

  366. Iris says:
    @Tadeo

    This further opens the “Moon Landing” can of worms.

    The Pr of Planetary Geoscience states:

    It is already known that the Moon’s average surface is a slightly reddish version of dark grey, though less red than the planet Mercury and much less red than Mars, whose surface is genuinely red as a result of oxidation of iron minerals (essentially rust).

    How come this does not show in NASA photos?

    He informs that the Chinese “calibrated” the raw image to decrease the level of red component, but also states:

    It is a pity that CNSA [China’s space agency] did not add a colour calibration strip onto the ramps of the Chang’e 4 lander, in the foreground of the pictures above.

    The colour calibration strip is a physical reference to adjust the calibration as per how humans would perceive the considered colour. So if there was no reference, how did the Chinese “calibrate” the level of red? Could they have done it by diplomacy, to avoid yet another American tantrum?

    The Pr also diplomatically highlights that Jack Schmitt of Apollo 17, i.e. the last alleged Moon mission, finally “found” a patch of reddish soil on the Moon. So, luckily, after so many missions, the penny finally dropped. The photo is a tribute to Kubrick (reference strip to the left).

    Finally, if the Chinese, using 21st Century technology, still had to calibrate their pictures to match the Moon’s real colour, how come no such calibration was necessary with 1970’s equipment, which has apparently produced right-first-time pristine “photos of Moon soil” ?

    • Replies: @Tadeo
  367. Ahoy says:

    Here is another fraud, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, that the chosen are hard at work now to build her historical profile as a great jurist.

    At 87 and having suffered a serious accident they are trying to tell us that she is able to send her briefs and her vote via internet from home.

    The historian of tomorrow will portray her in school books as the most illustrious Supreme Court Judge. A real bionic woman.

  368. chuckywiz says:

    My problem is not with Einstein’s abilities and intellect. His well orchestrated hype and over rating has gone too far.
    Einstein did not believe in expanding universe and Hubble had to show him. He later came up with this BS that universe is expanding but it would shrink, eventually, like a Greek Dance. He also had fit with Neil Bohr on Quantum mechanics and particles. Bohr had to tell him to stop telling God what to do.

    Last year I was in Berlin and while waiting for the bus I started talking to young Indian or Pakistani young man who talked about dreams, Deepak Chopra (another Fraud) and energy and brought up Einstein name in every modern invention, cell phones, quantum mechanics, energy….. I had to correct him on quantum mechanics and cell phones etc.
    This is what going on. Complete brain washing by the selected few who form their own subculture, pat each other and try to explain things that they dont understand themselves. This E=mC2 business? they become orgasmic during discussions to pretend how knowledgeable they are?

    I prefer Richard Feynman who is simple enough for me.

    • Replies: @Iris
  369. FB says: • Website
    @chuckywiz

    Excuse me, IDIOT…

    Do you actually understand what the theory of relativity is…?

    Why don’t you go ahead and explain it to us…?

    We’ll all be waiting for your horseshit examples…

    The mass energy equivalence formula E = mc^2 is one particular PREDICTION of the theory of special relativity…not the theory itself…

    Do you know what a mathematical derivation is…?

    Of course not, so how do you expect somebody to now educate you on how that one particular formula is related to the literally reams of math that went into the theory of relativity…?

    It would be like trying to teach my cat to play Stairway to Heaven…

    To make this understandable for a complete retard like yourself and many others here, it is sufficient to state SIMPLE FACTS…

    The mass-energy equivalence is PART of the theory of relativity…do you dispute that, idiot…?

    The theory of relativity is used everyday to correct clocks used in GPS and other satnav systems, since the whole principle revolves around measuring precisely distances from the sats to the receiver on the ground…even small errors in the calculated length of time it takes a signal to get to the receiver means large errors in the calculated position…

    Do you dispute that, RETARD…? [you did until a minute ago…]

    But for those who are not completely uneducated about math and physics [surely there must be one or two here…?], I will provide a very brief math explanation…

    Starting from the basic Pythagorean notion of distance between two points, it can be defined as…

    delta d^2 = delta x^2 = delta y^2 = delta z^2

    In reality, this definition of distance does not hold if any of the points are moving relative to each other, especially at substantial velocities approaching the speed of light…this was the entire huge problem that came about with Maxwell’s electromagnetism, which means our then understanding of such simple things as distance between two points was not longer true…

    With relativity, we get what is the analog of Pythagorean distance, which is the spacetime interval, s^2…

    Is the lightbulb beginning to come on yet…?…we are talking about measuring distances with GPS…

    But now if we do further math we find that the mass-energy equivalence expressed in E = mc^2 actually DERIVES from a much simpler and more fundamental formula involving the relationship of spacetime…

    S^2 = delta x^2 – delta t^2

    Where x is spatial distance, and t is time…

    From there Einstein’s relativity math lets us calculate precisely how two factors affect the time that is measured by a clock…the velocity at which the clock moves, and the gravitational effect it is subject to…both are CRUCIAL in the precise timekeeping needed for calculating TRUE distances, and from there, using triangulation, position in space…

    Btw, E = mc^2 is used in nuclear physics, making it possible for us to have electricity from nuclear power generators…the nuclear reaction converts mass into energy…

    • Replies: @FB
  370. Iris says:
    @chuckywiz

    I prefer Richard Feynman who is simple enough for me.

    A great physicist and the most wonderful teacher that ever existed. I am sure the Angels have fallen in love with him, too.

  371. Tadeo says:
    @Iris

    Finally, if the Chinese, using 21st Century technology, still had to calibrate their pictures to match the Moon’s real colour, how come no such calibration was necessary with 1970’s equipment, which has apparently produced right-first-time pristine “photos of Moon soil” ?

    Analog Cameras needed a calibration color strip, back in 1969. Today’s Digital Cameras use software and data packets to recalibrate

    https://www.yokogawa-blog.de/en/measurement-techniques/#gref

    In fact, the photos that appear in that BBC article look just like NASA’s

    Just saying

    • Replies: @Iris
  372. FB says: • Website
    @FB

    Made a typo to my Pythagorean formula above…it should read…

    delta d^2 = delta x^2 + delta y^2 + delta z^2

  373. Albert F. says:

    Money talks, credit stalks, and bullshit discovers the theory of relativity.

  374. Iris says:
    @Tadeo

    Analog Cameras needed a calibration color strip, back in 1969. Today’s Digital Cameras use software and data packets to recalibrate

    You misunderstood the purpose of the colour reference strip. I suggest you read the link embeded in the page you posted, where the Geology professor explains its utility and regrets the Chinese did not use one in their recent mission:

    It is a pity that CNSA did not add a colour calibration strip onto the ramps of the Chang’e 4 lander, in the foreground of the pictures above. The British Beagle2 lander on Mars, which landed successfully in 2003 but failed to communicate, famously carried a colour calibration target in the form of a Damien Hirst artwork. NASA’s Mars Curiosity rover carries colour calibration targets too.

    https://theconversation.com/change-4-why-the-moons-far-side-looks-red-in-new-images-109452

  375. a_german [AKA "a__German"] says:

    From there Einstein’s relativity math lets us calculate precisely how two factors affect the time that is measured by a clock

    Your’e sure? I can’t grab it. Methink there is a different equation that describes the “Zeitdilatation”

    The mass energy equivalence formula E = mc^2 is one particular PREDICTION of the theory of special relativity

    Maybe i am wrong, but i can’t see a formula. There is a equation, an interesting equation.

    It describes how to convert two physical phenomena into a concept. The concept has the unit kg(ly/a)² or so.

    That’s common sense, similar to the easterbunny hiding painted eggs because jesus died on the cross – for you.

    After you go to the relativity of time. That was debunked by the twin paradoxon a few years after the initial issue of this theorie. That was rejectected with some Lorentz Transformations in coordinate systems nobody ever saw in the real world.

    Sure that´s understandable, but for whom?

    • LOL: gay troll
    • Replies: @FB
  376. anonimo11 says:
    @FB


    Didn’t Lorentz come up with time dilation though?

    No, not in the sense of a USABLE theory…

    I assure you that Lorentz and Poincare’s findings were and are completely usable. A computer uses their findings for me millions of times a day. There is really nothing in special relativity that can not be derived from the work of those two.

    • Replies: @FB
    , @Ivan
  377. FB says: • Website
    @anonimo11

    Oh is that right, idiot…?

    Then why don’t you explain to us just how the Lorentz transformation is used in computer…and how it supposedly STANDS ALONE, as opposed to being a part of relativity theory…?

    Ridiculous little spitballs like this contribute absolutely nothing to anyone’s understanding…

    So go ahead retard, here is your chance to explain to us how this all works…

    • Replies: @anonimo11
    , @Ivan
  378. FB says: • Website
    @a_german

    Methink there is a different equation that describes the “Zeitdilatation”

    Then, by all means, go ahead and EXPLAIN it for us…

    And while you’re at it, go right ahead and EXPLAIN to us the difference between a formula and an equation…

    • Replies: @a_german
  379. Rdm says:
    @Iris

    This is indeed interesting.

    If Rothschild has 2 trillions, the world is your oyster and “holocaust industry” is a chapter 1.

  380. Iris says:
    @anonimo11

    This, and other objections, could be easily validated using USSR radar and perhaps satellite data.

    Hey. If you are interested in the subject, please be informed that Pr Aleksander Popov, the Russian scientist who most thoroughly debunked the Moon Landing hoax, has also explained how the USSR became complicit of it.

    Soviet scientists knew from Day 1 that NASA’s Saturn V rocket launch vehicles were too underpowered to take the required payload to the outer space, let alone reach the Moon.
    So the Soviets set a trap to the Americans.

    When the empty Apollo 13 capsule was launched, it ended up in the Atlantic off the Azores islands, and was immediately picked up by a Soviet K-8 November class nuclear submarine.

    The Soviets later handed the Apollo 13 capsule back over to Americans aboard icebreaker USCGC Southwind, in a secret meeting that took place at Mourmansk in Sep 1970, with Hungarian officials acting as mediators and witnesses. See photo below published in the Hungarian press at the time.

    In exchange for keeping the Moon “non-landing” a secret, the USSR enjoyed a diplomatic honeymoon with the USA, and benefited from loans, investments, exports of grains, and all sorts of economic advantages.
    This lasted up to the point where the Soviet government, who was asking much sacrifices from its population in name of the Cold War, became so compromised that it could not blackmail the US anymore.

  381. Saggy says: • Website
    @Wizard of Oz

    I’m surprised you responded. You’re right that I do disregard you’re comments as not worth responding to. And, I speculated as to whether you were a Jew or a dupe, and …. from your latest nonsensical post …. I still can’t tell. But, in any case your comments are just the type of type of hypothetical drivel one expects from a Jew, and you throw in a few insults as well …. ‘deficiency of intellect’, …. more evidence for the J hypothesis. There is nothing of interest in your post regarding the hoax, sorry.

  382. anonimo11 says:
    @FB

    My, you can really fly off the handle. Lorentz alone is not enough, you also need the Poincare’ invariants. Lorentz will just tell you what a particular mechanical quantity is in a specific frame (given related quantities in another frame). The invariants specify, well, what the new invariant quantities are. before Poincare’, the (Newtonian) invariants for a point-like particle were time, mass and acceleration. After Poincare’ they were 4-scalars defined as in one of your prior comments.

    I read the Einstein papers first as a student and then having taught special relativity many times in college. I use SR every day in my work. Why should I give you the light of day, if all the equations in my programs were first written by someone other than Einstein? The equation is the physics.

    • Replies: @FB
  383. gay troll says:

    History is designed by the rich.

  384. Wtf says:
    @Just another serf

    You must be new here.
    Ron has tons of materials of the holohoax in this very site
    Normies just do not want to hear anything about it

  385. @Iris

    That is BP-1227, a “boilerplate” non-functioning test capsule. This “boilerplate” capsule was lost by the US Navy while practicing recovery procedure in the Bay of Biscay. “Boilerplate” capsules have nothing in common with a real Apollo capsule except the basic shape. Extra features are added depending in its mission. For astronauts practicing egress after splashdown, hatches and a very basic interior sans instruments would be fitted. More gibberish from Iris, who thinks “Black Ancient Egypt” was real.

  386. FB says: • Website
    @Larry Romanoff

    Still on the general topic of historical frauds, and since several have raised the matter, I have a curiosity about the Apollo moon landing.

    You might want to start with Dave McGowan’s very readable series Wagging the Moondoggie…

    McGowan is not any kind of technical expert, and he doesn’t get into a lot of the ‘fake photographs’ stuff, which is mostly non-conclusive anyway and a dead-end in my opinion, but he uses a rather common-sense approach to the question of how, after being so badly behind the Soviets for so long, did the US suddenly vault ahead so unbelievably, exploring a lot of known facts along the way…?

    This website has some interesting articles written by people with impressive technical backgrounds that raise some interesting technical issues, such as the ability of the Saturn V rocket to actually perform as required…some claim that filmed footage of the rocket’s climb into the atmosphere did not match the performance required…

    An investigation suggests the Apollo 11 rocket traveled many times slower than scheduled

    An even much more technical article focuses on one key aspect of the Rocketdyne F-1 engines used on the Saturn V, the regenerative cooling that is required on any high powered rocket engine, where rocket fuel is circulated through internal passages in the large bell-shaped thrust chamber, in order to carry away heat, just as an ordinary car engine requires liquid coolant to carry away heat…

    Did the Saturn V F-1 rocket engines correspond to NASA’s published data? – and were there fundamental design flaws in the F-1 engine?

    This is a highly technical paper that won’t be really understood by the layman reader, but for those with a thermal engineering background who can actually run the math and confirm what he is saying, this paper is absolutely devastating…

    For myself, possessing the technical background to fully math check these calculations by a very impressive rocket engine designer with advanced degrees from some of the most prestigious aerospace institutions, plus a lot of industry experience designing rocket engines, this exposition is extremely difficult to explain away…

    To me, it does not ‘prove’ that the moon landings were a hoax, and the author himself does not imply that, suggesting even that the Saturn rocket may have disguised additional engine stages under its fairings, in order to make up for the loss of engine performance that this analysis implies…

    Certainly I am now not taking anything for granted on the F-1 engine…this analysis is just too detailed and too genuine at the very highest technical level…

    There are other technical issues for me…first the very configuration of the mission…the safest way to the moon is a so-called ‘direct ascent’ mission…where the rocket leaves earth, then the lunar vehicle travels to the moon and lands directly…for return, the return module launches and leaves behind the now unnecessary part of the landing apparatus…

    This requires a more powerful rocket to get all this mass into space, since the craft landing on the moon also has to be big enough to hold enough fuel and engine power for the return trip to earth…

    If you were to leave a big chunk of that equipment orbiting the moon, then you simply need to ‘taxi’ down from that moon orbital station in a smaller craft, and on the return, taxi back up only as far as lunar orbit…you then get into the orbiting module and head back…it saves a lot of mass and means less rocket power is required…

    BUT…it also means a much more challenging extra step, which is for that lunar lander to now DOCK with that orbiting craft after the lander launches on the return trip…that kind of docking is now fairly routine, at least in low earth orbit…but still very challenging, and mishaps still do happen, like that SpaceX cargo resupply ship to the ISS that was lost a few years ago…

    There is also the separation part when the craft arrives in lunar orbit…the lander must separate now from the craft, so it can land on the moon…and hopefully rendezvous again on the return…this was an incredibly tall order for the 1960s…

    The Command Module on right that orbited the moon, with Lunar Module for descent on left

    There are other concerns too…one of them being that the lunar lander was supposedly pressurized to only 5 psi, which is one third the atmospheric pressure on the earth’s surface…and the pressure you have at an altitude of 27,000 ft, which nobody could survive for very long…

    To mitigate the low cabin pressure, it was pressurized with pure oxygen rather than ordinary air…but consider that just two years before Apollo 11, three astronauts were lost in a cabin fire on the launchpad in Apollo 1, blamed on a spark that ignited the oxygen in the crew capsule…

    Grissom, White, and Chaffee in front of the launch pad containing their AS-204 space vehicle

    And even that five psi cabin pressure would require a very stout pressure vessel, which would need to be spherical in shape…this means a stout structure that is not going to be very light…

    A cutaway of the crew compartment in the Lunar Module

    We notice that the bottom of the compartment is a flat floor, which is not a good choice for a pressure vessel since a flat surface needs to be much stronger and heavier than a spherical pressure vessel…also why cover the pressure vessel and lose a lot of space…?

    The Russian LK lunar lander for the Soviet moon landing program

    This lander was quite a bit heavier than the Lunar Module built by Grumman Aircraft, only had room for one cosmonaut, who also had to stay in his space suit the whole time, and would have had to spacewalk from the lunar orbiter to get into it…

    Here’s another view of the Lunar Lander crew cabin, which had a volume of 160 cubic feet, or a little more than a cube five feet on a side…the question, just by looking at these illustrations, is whether that pressure vessel was indeed strong enough to take that kind of pressurization…?

    The lander is one of the most problematic aspects from a technical perspective…it is much much lighter than the Russian analog, while having far more crew room and functionality…it doesn’t make sense, considering the Russians’ technical capability…

    Finally, here is what is perhaps the most inexplicable thing surrounding the whole moon landing story…

    Here are the Apollo 11 crew meeting the press and public after their historic journey to the moon…

    What the hell is wrong with these guys…?…one commenter notes that he’s seen happier guys at a funeral…

    I have never seen this kind of demeanor, intonation or body language in any news conference following any space mission…the Shuttle, trips to the ISS you name it…the astronauts and cosmonauts are typically spirited, animated and even ebullient, as one would expect…

    This is the biggest mystery of the whole thing to me…

    • Thanks: Jazman
    • Replies: @Rdm
    , @ivan
  387. FB says: • Website
    @anonimo11

    I read the Einstein papers first as a student and then having taught special relativity many times in college.

    Yeah, sure you have…and I’m the Ghost of Christmas Future…😂 😂 😂

    Why should I give you the light of day, if all the equations in my programs blablabla…

    Because you made a very SPECIFIC claim here about using Lorentz’s math in your computer…

    A computer uses their findings for me millions of times a day.

    But you are unable to EXPLAIN anything about how you use Lorentz…?

    I guess you are some kind of ‘secret’ agent…?

    But guess what…these things are very very well known in science, so your bullshit doesn’t begin to work…

    • Replies: @Ivan
    , @anonimo11
  388. Ivan says:
    @anonimo11

    Agreed. The entire content of special relativity is contained in that simple invariant the Lorentz invariant which is the Pythagorean metric for what is the mathemaical convenience called spacetime . It is all there is to SR. The rest of the malarkey about shrinking time and dilating length is something Einstein pulled out of his ass. Poincare himself introduced much of the confusion which has bedeviled students ever since with all the talk of measuring rods and synchronising clocks. The audacious Einstein simply declared that such distortions were real. That is the content of his originality with which he supposedly banished the ether. Poincare the much greater mathematician was content to leave such speculations aside. For which he is derided as a conventionalist, by those cannot get enough of Einstein’s speculations.

  389. Ivan says:
    @FB

    Do you know how to extract square roots? That is all the computation there is. The transformation is there to reconcile measurements in two different inertial frames. Similar to transforming a local time from NY to Singapore.

    • Replies: @FB
  390. Ivan says:
    @FB

    Your remarks show that you have no understanding of what you are talking about. But that is a normal condition for you isn’t it?

  391. FB says: • Website
    @Ivan

    You obviously haven’t the first clue about physics…

    Do you know how to extract square roots?

    I think you should be more worried about ‘extracting’ something else…

  392. anonimo11 says:
    @FB

    look, I enjoyed your posts about aerodynamics, re; the yemen attacks on Saudi refineries. But you are out of your depth here, you are an engineer. You can just look at the wikipedia (I know, I know) pages about Poincare’ and Lorentz to find out it was all there probably in 1900, and certainly in 1904.

    In regard to how the Lorentz transf. are used (since you asked). I work in particle physics since circa 1979. We usually produce particles in a frame, called lab frame, which is not exactly the frame where the total momentum is zero (that would be the CM frame). Particle quality cuts are usually applied in the lab frame, because that is where particles interact with detectors. But kinematic cuts, to select a favorable region of phase space to study the topic of your paper, must be done in the CM frame. So we go back and forth between the two, using solely the Lorentz transf. Then we build Poincare’ invariants (in either frame, they are invariant), since rel. quantum mechanics laws depend only on invariant quantities. You seem unable to distinguish between equations and hype. The equations are everything.

    • Replies: @FB
  393. Jazman says:
    @FB

    Thanks God we have you and couple other guys with real knowledge vs google experts

  394. Ivan says:

    Much of the awe that Einstein inspires among the public at large, is the half-remembered idea that he somehow predicted the atom bomb . Untrue . Winston Churchill read of the possibility of a bomb which can unleash the forces of Creation itself from a HG Wells story circa 1902. Wells himself heard of that possibility from the chemist Frederick Soddy. That seemingly inert matter contains within it’s calm mask (Vladimir Soloviev) a prodigious fire was clear to scientists from the time they became aware of the staggering size of the electrostatic force and such phenomena as radioactivity. All of which predates Einstein. And the actual construction of the bomb itself had nothing to do with SR.

  395. S says:
    @Larry Romanoff

    why the entire Canadian and American media, historical, publishing, and educational systems, have buried these facts.

    The developer of the site linked below asked a similar question in regards to why so few in the US North knew they also had had slaves.

    While, along with some others, I’m agnostic about ‘millions’ of Chinese being ‘shanghied’, the broad answer seems to be the utterly devastating implications for the ‘progressive’ Multi-Cultural worldview if people were to widely grasp that it is a slavery based economic and political system, one which closely parallels the chattel slave holding society it evolved from…and that, amongst other things, it is grossly immoral.

    http://slavenorth.com

    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
  396. Excal says:
    @Rick Derris

    Sure, that’s the law everywhere. But in very many labs, it’s traditional that the man in charge gets his name on the work, whether he had anything to do with it or not. His minions tolerate it because they have little choice, and plenty of them don’t care all that much, and fighting is expensive, stressful and risky, and anyway maybe one day they’ll be the one whose name comes first.

    Most patent offices do, however, take a very dim view of patents which leave off the actual inventor entirely. Such patents are invalid, and if that can be proven, the IP enters public domain, and becomes unpatentable, since it’s published. Even the crookedest organisations which go through the trouble of patenting things usually prefer not to risk that.

  397. vot tak says:
    @Bombercommand

    “The Chinese male is at his core mentally ill, in a frothing rage 24/7 against “White Man”, and is hamfisted at propaganda.”

    Let me guess, shlomo. You lost a boyfriend to a gay Chinese.

    😀

    You are one seriously pathethic creature, even for a zionazi-gay.

  398. vot tak says:
    @Bombercommand

    “I can find no evidence that the European designs, prior to the Wrights turned and maneuvered.”

    Given the location you keep your head at:

    It’s unlikely you’ll ever find anything beyond your own fecal matter, sclomo. Which I’m sure suits you fine.

    😀

    As for others flying in circles without the sacred name:

    Henri Farman
    French pioneer aviator and airplane manufacturer

    https://www.britannica.com/biography/Henri-Farman

    “French aviation pioneer and aircraft builder who popularized the use of ailerons, moveable surfaces on the trailing edge of a wing that provide a means of lateral control.

    With his brother, Maurice Farman, he modified a Voisin pusher biplane, now known as the Voisin-Farman I, and in January 1908 won an important prize for the first circular flight of 1 km (0.6 mile). In 1909 he set a world record for endurance with a flight of 234.3 km (145.59 miles) in the Farman III.”

    They were doing turns, shlomo. Just not as tight. And that was where the Wrights made their impression. It was not that the europeans had not thought of rolling/banking, it was they thought it was too dangerous a manuever after the deaths of Lillianthal and Percey. They didn’t understand stalls and worked towards making aircraft stable. The surprise the Wrights generated in their 1908 euro tour was that it was possible to bank an aircraft without seeing it slide to the ground due to loss of lift. (I realise this might be a little too technical for you, shlomo…). The euros were playing it conservative and trying to keep their experimental aircraft level as much as possible, going for stability, due to this. Claiming they did not create maneuverable aircraft is dishonest, or that of an adolescent bugger wannabe.

    The Wright’s obsession with greed and their desire to make everyone pay them to build an aeroplane actually set back aviation in some ways. But it also advanced it in others, as inventers worked on other avenues to avoid the Wright frivolous legal actions.

    The Wright’s wing warping was at the time a great breakthrough, but it was a dead end. Within a year, by 1909, it was an obvious wrong direction. A warped wing is a very weak wing, mechanically, can’t handle G forces. It is also not a very accurate method of controlling lift. Ailerons work much better. At least then and now. Likely future construction materials will alter this fact.

    The Wrights compounded this by attempting to stifle aviation by trying to force inventers to pay them. This screwed up aviation advancement in the usa big time and both hampered aviation elsewhere with anearlier version of the familiar american sanctions thrown about now in tantrums.

    • Agree: FB
    • Replies: @ivan
    , @Bombercommand
    , @Bleuazur
    , @FB
  399. ivan says:

    Some have claimed that GPS satellites would not work if not for Einstein’s theories on spacetime. Therefore we should all keep our inner Hitler bottled up . Upon examination this claim is another in the line of authority by hand-waving and general cluelessness.

    GPS works by trilateration :
    https://gisgeography.com/trilateration-triangulation-gps/

    Its accuracy is determined by several atmospheric factors :
    https://gisgeography.com/gps-accuracy-hdop-pdop-gdop-multipath/

    But let us for the sake of argument agree that both special and general relativistic corrections are required:

    First we note that the special relativity corrections are of the order of v/c (the rapidity) where v is speed of the satellite and c is the speed of light .
    v = 30,000 km/hr should be a generous figure,
    c = 300,000 x 3600 (that is , the speed of light in km/s , times , the number of seconds in an hour)
    thus v/c = 0.003
    It is claimed that GPS is accurate to 10 metres,
    therefore the correction amounts to (0.003) times (10) = 3 cm (at the most)

    Secondly the GR (general relativity) correction as indicated on page 116 of the following
    https://web.mit.edu/6.055/old/S2009/notes/bending-of-light.pdf

    is given in angles as 10^(-9) radians. Supposing that the satellites are at geostationary orbit
    at 36,000 km , This correction due to the bending of light is = 10^(-9) times 36000 km
    which works out to around 4 cm. The formula applied is arc-length = angle in radians, times the radius. The radius here being the height of a satellite above the Earth

    Suppose then that these corrections actually add up instead of cancelling each other,
    that is , 3cm due to SR and 4 cm due to GR , for a total of 7 cm, we can see that at (7cm/10m), that is 0.7% maximum, it is a distinction without a difference in the light of the corrections due to atmospheric factors.

    But some may argue that errors will accumulate in the time base of the atomic clocks that the GPS satellites carry. Such people should not worry as the atomic clocks are regularly synchronized with ground stations.

    As a further point the errors due to SR and GR may in fact cancel depending on the state of motion, particularly on weather the satellite constellation is approaching the GPS receiver or away from it, in which case the SR correction should be -3cm. Here then we are in leprechaun territory : The GR leprechauns place a 4cm correction whereupon immediately, the evil SR pooka takes away 3cm. Leaving a paltry 1 cm for the spacetime effect.

    GPS certainly does not depend on Einstein’s theories for its proper functioning.

    • Replies: @anonimo11
    , @FB
    , @Vojkan
  400. ivan says:
    @vot tak

    Bombercommand queried:

    “I can find no evidence that the European designs, prior to the Wrights turned and maneuvered.”

    The brothers flew at the end of 1903.

    You replied with a story from 1908. Well done.

    • Troll: vot tak
  401. Ludwig says:

    I can only comment on the whole “Einstein-was-a-fraud” exposition. In short, the author is wrong.

    Let me start backwards: where I agree with the author is that there is a lot of hype created which then self-generates and invariably there are those who profit from the hype (and not necessarily even the person being hyped). The flip side of the hype is that many others who should get credit are censored out of history.

    While perhaps in the public eye, thanks to the hype, there was only one physicist, Einstein who did anything, even a basic student of physics is aware of the tremendous amount of work done by many important physicists – geniuses in their own right – as a lead up to the beginning part of the 20th century, those like Faraday, Maxwell – whose equations (themselves from Faraday, Ampere) led to the discovery that electricity and magnetism and what was then known as light were all one and propagated at the speed of light. This was related to the search for the medium that was thought to be needed to propagate light.

    An experiment to find this medium – called aether – most famously by Michaelson and Morley led to the puzzling discovery that the speed of light appeared to be constant no matter what the speed of the observer (unlike what our classical intuition tells us). Lorenz – working concurrently with others – came up with a set of equations – dubbed later by Poincare as the Lorenz transformations – that would account for this. But he didn’t get to a physical description of what was going on and still believed in the aether. Poincare moved the ball along with his work on time.

    It was Einstein who is credited with the singular breakthrough about postulating that the speed of EM waves (and indeed any massless particle) was a constant regardless of inertial frames purely from theoretical considerations (using the implication of Maxwell’s Equations to begin with). The genius attributed to Einstein even by many of his peers was his insights into the nature of the things with the maths following (versus making up an equation to fit observations). Special Relativity was a fundamentally different way of thinking of inertial frames.

    Much of the Maths – including the Energy-Mass equivalence – is, as has been pointed out, relatively trivial (for trained Physicists) but the Beauty of his 1905 papers – his other two were on the Brownian Motion and the Photoelectric effect (building on Planck) for which he won the Nobel in 1921 – were the physical intuition that generated them.

    Einstein’s tour de force was General Relativity which led to a fundamental physical paradigm shift of not just Gravity but its relation to the very fabric of the Universe, space time. Again, Einstein was guided by a deep intuition about well known problems going back to Newton about Gravity, including the Equivalence Principle and Action-at-a-distance.

    The part that took Einstein the longest was the complex Maths to describe it for which he turned to those like Grossman (who himself built on work by the genius Riemann of the 19th century) and others (including, as was later revealed, his then wife). None of this is controversial or “hidden” and everyone who has studied graduate Physics is aware of all this work and the various players, geniuses in their own right (even if the public may not be aware of them).

    Einstein was revered by his peers – many of them Nobel prize winners themselves (of mostly different European ethnicities) – because of his physical insights into problems and starting from simple intuition before the Maths. (And incidentally, while Einstein was not a Mathematicial genius, he mastered Reimannian geometry – which is now a basic requirement to work on Relativity. He was a pretty good mathematician, in general as good as any of his brilliant peers).

    Indeed it is precisely this reliance on Physical intuition that undid Einstein who could not accept Quantum Theory which was based on experimental evidence and Mathematical theory but that defied (and continues to defy) our normal physical intuition. However, Einstein, through his constant challenges to Quantum Theory from physical intuition principles helped refine the theory and helped those like Neils Bohr (another genius who along with Wolfgang Pauli, Erwin Shrodinger, Werner Heisenberg, Paul Dirac and others l) who formulated Quantum Theory over the years.

    Einstein continued to make various less-widely known but important contributions – though only what would be expected from brilliant physicists of which there were many and not paradigm shifting discoveries like the General Theory of Relativity (GTR) which along with Quantum Theory is regarded as the pinnacle of 20th century theoretical physics.

    So while Einstein may be hyped in the public for E=mc2, this is not why even among brilliant physicists and his peers, he was held in high esteem. It was his peerless physical intuition culminating in GTR – which is seen as uniquely revolutionary, unlike theSpecial Theory which while revolutionary, was almost inevitable with all the work that was done till then waiting for someone – if not Einstein then someone else – to dot the i s ans cross the t s.

    Long story short: the claim Einstein was just some paper-pushing plagirizer not only is without merit and insults Einstein’s contributions but his peers’ opinions.

    And finally: I couldn’t care less about Einstein’s private life or “off court” behavior. Part of myth making I find odious to elevate everything about someone who is brilliant in one field to a pedestal to be the ultimate human in all respects, only to then be disappointed when they show human imperfections. The converse is true as well: people find imperfections in someone and then question their competence in the field that made them famous.

    • Agree: FB
    • Replies: @Ivan
  402. dearieme says:
    @syonredux

    I’m quite sure that the true origin of concentration camps is lost in the mists of antiquity.

    I’m sure you’re right but the discussion concerns the uncritical acceptance of Nazi propaganda about the origin of the expression and its meaning in practice. I take it that the Spanish and American camps were set up for the same purpose as the British ones – as a step in anti-guerilla warfare. Or were their purposes different? And does it matter anyway? What’s done is done.

    In Gaul you were lucky to be sold into slavery. If Caesar lost patience with an enemy he’d slaughter the lot of ’em.

    I happen just to have read his book (in English). I should have read it decades ago but my Latin classes put me off it.

  403. dearieme says:
    @FB

    I fear you are wasting your time trying to explain what a scientific theory is to people who you wouldn’t trust to wipe their own bottoms. Look too at the idiocy of discussing slavery by pretending that unskilled labourers are “wage slaves” and therefore slaves.

    It’s a fine thing for Mr Unz to keep this site open for a wide range of writing; you just have to accept that some of the commenters are really stupid and ignorant. And some, I imagine, are pretending to be stupid and ignorant in hopes of provoking outrage.

    Unz is right to preserve free speech here; just accept the hate and drivel as part of the price of free speech.

    On second thoughts perhaps I’m overlooking one particular subsection of the commenters. Some of them are, I suspect, insane. Bonkers. Mad. Doolally. Away with the fairies.

    • Replies: @S
  404. Robjil says:
    @Iris

    Thanks Iris for pointing out the value of this book. The only western language that all the books of this author has been published in is Polish. The French version was only his first book.

    Many Jews are descendants of Jews who settled in the Polish Kingdom in the Middle Ages. This could be the reason that so many Poles are so interested in their creation’s activities in the world.

    https://www.polin.pl/en/event/statute-kalisz-750th-anniversary-first-privilege-granted-polish-jews

    On 16 August 1264, in the town of Kalisz, prince Bolesław the Pious issued a statute (charter) for Jews living in Greater Poland, which was under his rule. This piece of legislation, approved in the 14th century by Casimir the Great and then confirmed by subsequent rulers of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (Stanisław August being the last of them), was intended as the core document regulating the legal status of Jews in Poland for many centuries.
    The Statute tackled the issues of authority over the Jewish population and defined rules under which Jews were allowed to engage in lending and trade, as well as norms related to their relations with Christians. The Statute provided for penalties for desecration of a Jewish cemetery or a synagogue. It also contained provisions concerning blood libel directed against Jews.
    Confirmed by subsequent rulers, the Statute of Kalisz became a symbol of Jews’ safe living in Poland.

    Here is the list of the five books of Hongbing that have been translated into Polish. No other western language has all the five have been translated.

    https://www.amazon.com/Books-Hongbing-Song/s?rh=n%3A283155%2Cp_27%3AHongbing+Song

    Wojna o pieniadz (Polish Edition)
    by Song Hongbing | Jan 1, 2017
    Wojna o pieniadz 2 (Polish Edition)
    by Song Hongbing | Jan 1, 2017
    Wojna o pieniadz 3 (Polish Edition)
    by Song Hongbing | Jan 1, 2016
    5.0 out of 5 stars 1
    Wojna o pieniadz 4 (Polish Edition)
    by Song Hongbing | Jan 1, 2018
    Wojna o pieniadz 5
    by Song Hongbing | Jan 1, 2020

  405. anonimo11 says:
    @ivan

    you are approximately correct when it comes to space corrections, but the TIME correction is much larger, being of order vd/((delta t) c^2), where d is the distance. you have these satellite clocks moving through different gravity (they have elliptical orbits), so the satellite clocks are ticking at different rates at apogee and perigee. then you have the problem of how to synchronize with the reference clocks at sea level. The sat. clocks get out of whack very quickly, generating hundreds of meters errors if not continuously corrected (that is, the time errors are cumulative). Then there is the problem of the local gravity (both standard clock and your receiver), since the Earth is oblate and with continents and mountain chains generating multipole effects in the gravity field.

    Then there is the problem of propagation of light in a rotating frame (not strictly a relativistic problem I know). Light does not propagate in a straight line there. The GPS sat. velocity is 4km/sec, or 14,400km/hr.

    I am moving these days, but if you are interested I can post tonight.

    • Replies: @anonimo11
    , @Ivan
  406. @vot tak

    You have merely restated everything in my comment, with a slightly different emphasis, and you act like you are refuting my comment. I didn’t claim a “turn” was impossible only using a rudder, but SAFE MANUEVERING is impossible. You misdescribe the January 1908 Farman flight, there was no “circular flight” it was around a course, and the shape of that course is never described. Sure, Farman made some undescribed “turns”, but SAFELY no, and could he fly circles and figure eights? No. The Wright Brothers were doing all that in 1904. NO EUROPEAN FITTED AILERONS OR ANYTHING LIKE IT BEFORE THE WRIGHTS 1908 DEMONSTRATION IN FRANCE. After that demonstration they all rushed to copy the Wrights. Before the Wrights the Europeans were boneheadedly unaware that the most important aspect of successful flight, SAFE MANUEVERING was even a problem at all. Why would the Europeans need to copy the Wrights if the Europeans had already solved the problem? You’re not making any sense. Of course ailerons are better than wing warping, no one can expect the Wrights to get everything perfect, but considering the myriad of unsolved technical problems that the Wrights resolved and integrated into a successful system they succeeded admirably, and alone without the advantage of gobs of money and hundreds of inventors laboring at the same task, like the Europeans. Hell, look at Farman’s Voison flyer. In 1908 it had a crude floppy fabric wing covering, obvious in photos. Look at the “1909” model(Wikipedia photo from 1910), those new wings are clearly copied from the wings of the Wright Flyer filmed in France in 1908. The Wrights found and corrected the flaw in Lillenthal’s equations for wing design, they invented the first wind tunnel and used it to test model prototypes. How can you sneer like a knuckleheaded adolescent and twist yourself in a pretzel trying to pretend the Wrights were fakes and the Euros got there first? You have a nasty, halitosis spewing mouth like Fart Blossom(aka FB), and like “FB” are purely motivated by a nauseating, knee jerk anti-Americanism. Like “FB”, you cannot discuss anything in a coherant, civil fashion. Posting moronic, insulting cartoons puts you at the level of “Talblahblah”, obsessed with being right, Right, RIGHT!!!. Time to grow up, “vot tak”.

    • Thanks: Ivan
    • Troll: vot tak
    • Replies: @Ivan
    , @gavishti
  407. anonimo11 says:
    @anonimo11

    second try. the (fractional) correction to distance are of order v^2 (delta t) /c, with delta t being cumulative due to clock errors.

  408. @Biff

    Real historians know that colored people in Egypt were flying without the aid of machines long before the British arrived there and began shooting them for sport as the colored folk slowly circled the pyramids

    • Replies: @Biff
  409. To paraphrase author Samuel W. Mitcham Jr. (It Wasn’t About Slavery – copywrite 2020)

    “History is the study of the past with interpretation. Changing the interpretation, therefore changes history.”

  410. @Iris

    Let’s not forget many in the US were suspicious of the authenticity of Yuri Gagarin’s space flight. The Gagarin hoax was used by the American government/media to promote the rumor the USSR was ahead of us in space technology, therefore justifying the gazillion dollars America and newly created NASA must spend to catch up and pass our mortal enemy.

    But did Gagarin really go into space? Kennedy warmly congratulated Khrushchev for their achievement, but the fact that Kennedy did not contest this exploit was seen by the Russian people, and the whole world, as the confirmation that Gagarin’s exploits was fact
    Yet, some days later, articles appeared in several American newspapers which were describing his so-called space-flight as a hoax, and explaining why it was not credible. Some politicians, for example a representative from Illinois, Roman Pucinski, urged Kennedy not to accept Gagarin’s ‘achievement’ without proof from the Russians (which they have never provided – even to this day.)

    http://falsificationofhistory.co.uk/false-history/yuri-gagarin-a-fraud-through-and-through/

    • Replies: @Rdm
  411. Ivan says:
    @Bombercommand

    It may be that you are setting off these poor Tourette syndrome sufferers by your handle.

  412. Chuckywiz says:

    I am proud to be an idiot. Yesterday, I looked the word idiot in the dictionary and found my picture there. Happy feeling
    I noticed you are professor of physics (at least you are putting out your resume to impress others). In my life time I have dealt with several PhDs and believe me you remind of them. A legend in his/their own mind. Avoiding to answer the question directly (like economists), getting upset (plan ‘B’) and start throwing all kind of phrases or BS. This is very true when you accompany them overseas in Seminars and presentations.

    Stop pretending by throwing terms that ordinary people dont understand while yourself feeling good. All that BS about time dilution and aerodynamic and putting all those useless airplane pictures etc in your comments is useless. Apparently you have lot of time after jerking off in front of your cat and molesting your favorite sheep. Relatively speaking, you are fond of cats or sheep?

    A dumb and idiot like me again asking you again where is theory of relativity in E=mC2? it is a simple equation of energy, dont zig and zag. A pound of horse shit should produce lot of energy (when using speed of light and squiring it). Thanks to Einstein for solving climate change problem.

  413. mikemikev says:
    @FB

    I’m aware of what a theory is, thanks. I thought Einstein simply postulated the non existence of the ether. Which seems rather trivial. The predictive power was all there in Lorentz. Perhaps you can explain what Einstein predicts that Lorentz doesn’t.

    • Thanks: annamaria
  414. Ivan says:
    @Ludwig

    While I don’t think any sensible person could describe Einstein as a fraud it is the case that his 1905 paper on relativity was in all essentials a meaningless reinterpretation of the work of others. It was not him who discovered the Galilean principle of Relativity. That principle claims that it is impossible to detect absolute motion without acceleration which naturally results in a felt force, that is , one cannot detect unaccelerated motion. As for the speed of light being a constant, it is an unambiguous result of the wave motion of electromagnetism first discovered by Maxwell. Simple wave equations have something called stiffness which determines the speed of the wave. In the case of the electromagnetic wave , the stiffness is solely a function of the permittivity of free space and the permeability of free space. Both of these are measurable in the school laboratory. Hence we have measurement of these two in say a school by means of which the student concludes that the speed of light is 186000 miles per second. Another student on say Jupiter in an unaccelerated laboratory will also come to the same conclusion. But we say that if Jupiter is moving away at say 10000 miles per second, surely this must be added in some way to the speed of light. But here the Galilean Principle steps in. Absolute motion cannot be detected and we are left with both students assuming that they are both in inertial frames and both report a speed of 186000 miles per second. Einstein’s trick was to claim that time shrank or length distended introducing a level of confusion that has bedeviled an earnest student ever since. Quite a useless innovation that merely served to make the subject of electromagnetism more difficult than it already is.

    His paper on Brownian motion was anticipated by the Australian , Sutherland. Abraham Pais his biographer goes so far as to propose renaming it the Einstein-Sutherland equation. Very generous. But there is more to this. Sutherland’s papers and previous work appeared in the Philosophical Magazine which Einstein surely had access to in his patent office. Einstein’s fans claim that he was in splendid isolation in the Swiss Patent Office but he was an avid reader of scientific publications which would have been easily available to him in what was after all a patent office. For some Germans the significance of this paper was that it showed that there were atoms, but the English chemist John Dalton about one hundred years before had already used the atomic idea to explain the molecular mass of compounds.

    The only paper from 1905 that was original with him was his explanation of the photoelectric effect in terms that were dazzlingly simple and understandable.

    • Replies: @chuckywiz
  415. Ivan says:
    @anonimo11

    Thank you. I do not know how to adduce the time corrections . But isn’t that precisely the point of synchronising with reference stations on Earth – so that there is no cumulative time drift? As an error control system a servo mechanism can suffer any number of perturbations that contribute to drift but as long as the error(s) are zeroed with reference to fixed points we should be assured that they are continuously corrected , with no cumulative errors.

    • Replies: @anonimo11
  416. Bleuazur says:
    @vot tak

    (…)It’s unlikely you’ll ever find anything beyond your own fecal matter, sclomo. Which I’m sure suits you fine.

    Why do you have to be so insulting??? I enjoy reading the arguments from everyone here, but you (and some others as well) do really behave in an unacceptable way and spoil my pleasure.

    There is a big lack of moderation here !

  417. FB says: • Website
    @ivan

    Congrats…you have taken the PRIZE for most ridiculous retard on UNZ…not a trivial accomplishment by any measure…

    Supposing that the satellites are at geostationary orbit at 36,000 km…

    No, the GPS sats are in medium earth orbit, at a height of about 20,000 km [12,000 miles]…big difference…

    It is claimed that GPS is accurate to 10 metres, therefore the correction amounts to (0.003) times (10) = 3 cm (at the most)

    Absolute rubbish…the position error without relativity math corrections would be SEVERAL MILES after just one day…

    The time dilation due to the two effects I mentioned previously, speed of the sats, plus the acceleration of earth’s gravitational field add up to about 7 microseconds per day error on the atomic clocks onboard the sats…that means that after just one day without correction, your GPS telling you that you are one mile from a gas station will have an error of up to TEN miles…

    As for your ridiculous diarrhea about light refraction in the atmosphere…first, the atmosphere is not 36,000 km thick…refraction occurs mostly in the troposphere which is only 9 km thick at the poles, increasing to 16 km at the equator…in satnav literature the tropopause and stratosphere are usually included in the refraction calcs, which extends to about 50 km…the atmosphere above that is negligibly thin, disappearing almost completely by 100 km…

    It means the positional error introduced by refraction can be from about 10 to 20 meters, depending on the angle of the sat with respect to the atmosphere, since a shallow angle means the signal has to travel through more atmosphere…

    In any case modeling of the troposphere removes about 95 percent of the error…in any case, refraction is an error that is orders of magnitude less than the time dilation errors…

    Like I said already, you know ABSOLUTE ZILCH about physics, much less how it applies to time-keeping-based navigation, which btw has a rich history of hundreds of years…see the marine chronometer…

    …we should all keep our inner Hitler bottled up…

    It’s pretty obvious that you are keeping something ‘bottled up’…

  418. FB says: • Website
    @anonimo11

    You seem unable to distinguish between equations and hype. The equations are everything.

    And you seem unable or unwilling to admit you shot your mouth off and dug yourself into a hole…

    Let me make this simple for you…

    First, Lorentz was working on the PURE MATHEMATICS in the late 1800s…[he also relied on the existing work of many others, going back all the way to Kepler…]

    This math was not applied to physics in any way until the turn of the 20’th century, when it became clear that the Lorentz transformations exhibit the same kind of symmetry as Maxwell’s equations…

    In 1905, Poincaré recognized the significance of the Lorentz work and named the mathematical transformation after him, as a mathematical group…

    Later that year, Einstein DERIVED the Lorentz transformation under the assumption of the principle of relativity and the fact that light is a CONSTANT under any reference frame…

    That is a HUGE difference my friend…the fact that you claim to work in particle physics, and yet also claim that the math used as a tool to derive one of the most significant scientific insights of all time, ie the very notion of reference frames and how they REALLY work, is more important than the physical framework itself is beyond belief…

    It’s like saying the guy who invented the wheel didn’t do anything because circles already existed…

    • Replies: @annamaria
    , @anonimo11
  419. Albert F. says:

    After thousands of years of Asian-backed credit invading Europe, North America became a wide open sex-pot for the greedy and breedy coming here with all the skills of consummate hustlers. Welcome to America!

  420. @annamaria

    annamaria-thanks for putting in your article “huge questions.com-highly interesting”!

  421. FB says: • Website
    @vot tak

    The Wrights compounded this by attempting to stifle aviation by trying to force inventers to pay them. This screwed up aviation advancement in the usa big time…

    Absolutely correct…this unfortunate fact is beyond dispute today…

    The patent war stalled development of the U.S. aviation industry.[4][6][7][5][8]

    As a consequence, airplane development in the United States fell so far behind Europe[4] that in World War I American pilots were forced to fly European combat aircraft, instead.[10][11][12][13]

    After the war began, the U.S. Government pressured the aviation industry to form an organization to share patents.[4][14]

    Wright brothers patent war

    • Replies: @Bombercommand
  422. Rdm says:
    @FB

    Thanks for piecing all together. It was strange as hell.

    Go to 3:19 mark,

    with the intent of pointing out …

    was he implying that they have guns pointed at them?

    – We’ve seen happier and smiling faces from those crossing the US-Mexico borders.
    – We’ve seen smiling faces from North Korean winning Olympics.

    But these guys …

  423. Tim too says:

    Relativistic effects in GPS:
    http://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu/~pogge/Ast162/Unit5/gps.html

    “.,,The combination of these two relativitic effects means that the clocks on-board each satellite should tick faster than identical clocks on the ground by about 38 microseconds per day (45-7=38)! This sounds small, but the high-precision required of the GPS system requires nanosecond accuracy, and 38 microseconds is 38,000 nanoseconds. If these effects were not properly taken into account, a navigational fix based on the GPS constellation would be false after only 2 minutes, and errors in global positions would continue to accumulate at a rate of about 10 kilometers each day! The whole system would be utterly worthless for navigation in a very short time. ”

    • Thanks: FB
    • Replies: @ivan
  424. @FB

    In 1914, the Europeans had relatively primitive aircraft, how could they not, no one clearly understood the potential of aircraft in war. It was the imperatives of the war that drove incredibly rapid development in aircraft as the Germans and the Allies struggled for air supremacy. Air observation to direct artillery was absolutely essential to locate targets in opposition defenses, and correct aim. Fighter aircraft were essential to protect friendly observer aircraft and attack opposition observer aircraft. Bombers and transport were not an issue, yet. The alledged point you are trying to make is, as usual, completely wrong and irrelevant. Stick to claiming the Apollo Moon landings never happened, that suits your mental illness.

    • Replies: @gay troll
  425. Rdm says:
    @Johnny Walker Read

    That’s why we’re still using Russian trampoline?

    • Replies: @Johnny Walker Read
  426. gay troll says:
    @Bombercommand

    None of those coked up actors in unpressurized space suits ever gets more than like 12 inches off the ground in any of the Apollo videos. Which you would expect if they were horsing around in a movie studio in Laurel Canyon and not a low gravity environment where they (with their suit) would only weigh about 50 pounds. These dudes should be tripling their verticals and or their stride lengths, as they jog around and later golf. But they never demonstrate moon gravity, only slow motion.

    • Agree: Johnny Walker Read
    • LOL: FB
    • Replies: @Bombercommand
  427. Rdm says:
    @Johnny Walker Read

    In light of speaking hyperbole and exaggeration, Elon is another one in making.

    I respect Elon and some of his thought process. But the guy verbal articulation is as good as Bill. Both should go to viva class.

    I’m not saying we don’t have the capability to launch rockets into space. But to discredit Russian first ever manned spacecraft (or the first ever from the planet Earth) while relying on their space shuttle until now is shooting on one’s own foot. Granted, your article is aged-old but we’re talking about the current events.

  428. @gay troll

    Your comment is meaningless drivel. Six Apollo missions landed on the Moon, the locations are known. They all left behind a Descent Stage and many other pieces of equipment large and small including Lunar Rovers. The USSSR had a lunar program, China currently does and either would be tickled pink to be able to photo those six spots and chortle “Looked looked, no Americans landed on the Moon”. But they can’t. Because it happened. Get over it.

    • Agree: ivan
  429. @Gabriel Oliveira

    It is said that Wilhem II was Queen Victoria’s favourite grandson, and George V detested Wilhelm for that. There is also a claim that Wilhelm II hated Britain. It’s all speculation.
    I recall reading, many years ago, that pre WWI Germany was producing better products at lower prices that was taking trade away from Britain, not unlike what was happening during the 1930s.
    All wars are economic wars.

  430. ivan says:
    @FB

    This is the biggest mystery of the whole thing to me…

    It is no mystery at all. Perhaps you were expecting them to high-five, CAPITALISE their words and fling excrement all around like yourself? This press conference was clearly some time after they returned to the Earth, not at the time that they returned when they were happy to to be reunited with their families. They were giving a technical presentation of their flight, and they are lively enough for that format and for their time. Armstrong in particular was always noted for his laconic bearing. Some guys just do not boast, its the way they are. These men faced the real prospect of dying in space; they were all selected for their qualities of spirit as well their technical achievements. Stoicism in the face of whatever vicissitudes they had to face was expected of them and is reflected in their demeanour. Again listen to the presentation, that is exactly how many engineers who design a prototype with a very significant chance of failure talk. Thanks for the link, it makes it clear that they did really go to the Moon and come back to tell the tale.

    • Replies: @Rdm
    , @Dannyboy
  431. ivan says:
    @Tim too

    The combination of these two relativitic effects means that the clocks on-board each satellite should tick faster than identical clocks on the ground by about 38 microseconds per day (45-7=38)! This sounds small, but the high-precision required of the GPS system requires nanosecond accuracy, and 38 microseconds is 38,000 nanoseconds. If these effects were not properly taken into account, a navigational fix based on the GPS constellation would be false after only 2 minutes, and errors in global positions would continue to accumulate at a rate of about 10 kilometers each day! The whole system would be utterly worthless for navigation in a very short time.

    is a rephrasing of

    But at 38 microseconds per day, the relativistic offset in the rates of the satellite clocks is so large that, if left uncompensated, it would cause navigational errors that accumulate faster than 10 km per day! GPS accounts for relativity by electronically adjusting the rates of the satellite clocks, and by building mathematical corrections into the computer chips which solve for the user’s location. Without the proper application of relativity, GPS would fail in its navigational functions within about 2 minutes. from Prof Clifford Will’s article in

    https://physicscentral.com/explore/writers/will.cfm

    These guys seem to be quoting each other and in neither case are the calculation leading to their claims presented. I myself with my limited knowledge and mathematical ability have taken a stab at it above.

    The following article seems to clear through the all the mathematical mumbo-jumbo induced by the followers of GR by the simple device of returning to trigonometry and periodicity.

    http://www.alternativephysics.org/book/GPSmythology.htm

    I’ll say this for Einstein : He managed to sow massive confusion by resorting to the tensor calculus for the GR. A subject that is tedium itself as all kinds of concepts have to be discussed such as covariance and invariance, along with the Christoffel corrections and the Stress-Energy tensor, so that by the time one is halfway there, one has forgotten the starting point, in a thicket of indexes that can be verified only by detailed algebraic manipulation, which I am certain many simply take on faith.

    I’ll say this for Einstein he managed to obscure some basic calculations by hiding behind the tedious apparatus of the tensor calculus. Which should only be about the level of

    • Thanks: Vojkan
    • Replies: @FB
    , @Tim too
  432. Rdm says:
    @ivan

    The way you think is exactly the way a story about God created Men on Earth.

    Once upon a time, there was God …

    It took 200 years of scientific study to prove all the mumbo jumbo of Jesus and yet we still have anti-vaxxers to this day.

    You will pass the moon landing story to your children; a laconic astronaut, a milestone for human race, the greatest moment in history bla bla bla. After 4000 years (AD 6020), all other countries develop and catch up with the space race. But they couldn’t find Apollo 11 landing, 3 astronauts footprints, but the story must continue. One of your great great great great …. children will pass on the story.

    Once upon a time in 1969, there were three gospels landed on the Moon …

    • Replies: @Ivan
  433. gay troll says:

    Weird shit happens on the moon. Six missions and no stars were ever photographed. Those brilliant black ladies did all the right math to launch us to the moon, retro-rocket us down to the moon’s surface, hypergolically propel us off the moon’s surface, reattach us to the command module, get us back to Earth and safely through the atmosphere, with nary a single adverse event, except for the “Act of God” which struck the unlucky Apollo and was only staved off by Jim Lovell’s gym socks, but no one thought it would be a good idea to point a camera at the sky and take a picture of the stars? Apollogists claim there are no stars visible in the mission photos because of the harsh reflected light from the moon’s surface, and the high aperture values required to properly expose an image. Yet highlight detail is extreme in the shadows. There is clear evidence of multi point studio lighting, not the single lamp of the Sun.

    Finally, I would just like to point out that I Dream of Jeannie promoted NASA to the public after the assassination of JFK, and conditioned Americans to believe in the moon hoax.

  434. annamaria says:
    @FB

    “Einstein DERIVED the Lorentz transformation …”
    — Could you tell us more about A. Einstein’s command of mathematics? Also, you avoid carefully the main point of the article — the ugly problem with the bibliography in A. E. writings.

  435. FB says: • Website
    @ivan

    Wow…

    I’m right now reading through that ‘material’ you linked to…[one of the great things about the internet is that it’s possible for the mentally challenged community to participate…]

    Problem is, GPS receivers contain no atomic clock because there’s no room to fit one in. Plus it would be very expensive even if possible.

    That ‘time at the receiver’ must instead be determined from the satellites’ clocks. Therefore if the satellites’ clocks were running faster (or slower) than those on Earth, this ‘time at the receiver’ would likewise run faster or slower by exactly the same degree.

    Hence there would be no position error due to time dilation, and certainly no cumulative position error.

    Even a grade schooler would realize that this is of course impossible, since the satellites are all moving in different directions…

    A visual example of a 24 satellite GPS constellation in motion with the Earth rotating. Notice how the number of satellites in view from a given point on the Earth’s surface changes with time. The point in this example is in Golden, Colorado, USA (39.7469°N 105.2108°W).

    As can be seen, the sats are all moving in complex trajectories relative to one another…so the uncorrected time stamps of each are going to make it impossible for the receiver to calculate the distances…

    And btw, the receiver doesn’t need to have an atomic clock…why would it, it is updated by the nanosecond with ACCURATE atomic clock timestamps from the sats…

    Here is the website of this complete moron…

    He has ‘articles’ with titles like.. ‘Why Time Dilation must be impossible’…plus

    Alternatives to Relativistic Mass

    Faster than Light travel

    Magnetism explained

    Static Electricity

    Superconductivity

    Matter-Energy Conversion

    General Relativity…and more

    Now look here ‘ivan’…I think you’ve wasted enough of everybody’s time here with your stupidity …I’m delighted Mr Unz encourages the mentally retarded to participate here, but you really are making your presence felt smelt a little too much…

    • Replies: @chuckywiz
  436. Ivan says:
    @Rdm

    I saw the Apollo landing either live or a few days later in 1969 in Singapore. Along with the people looking up the ticker at Times Square in awe when I was 9 years old. So yeah a billion of us were. fooled ever since

    • Replies: @Olivier1973
  437. Tim too says:
    @ivan

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5253894/

    Relativity in the Global Positioning System
    Neil Ashby corresponding author

    [MORE]

    “The Global Positioning System (GPS) uses accurate, stable atomic clocks in satellites and on the ground to provide world-wide position and time determination. These clocks have gravitational and motional frequency shifts which are so large that, without carefully accounting for numerous relativistic effects, the system would not work. This paper discusses the conceptual basis, founded on special and general relativity, for navigation using GPS. Relativistic principles and effects which must be considered include the constancy of the speed of light, the equivalence principle, the Sagnac effect, time dilation, gravitational frequency shifts, and relativity of synchronization. Experimental tests of relativity obtained with a GPS receiver aboard the TOPEX/POSEIDON satellite will be discussed. Recently frequency jumps arising from satellite orbit adjustments have been identified as relativistic effects. These will be explained and some interesting applications of GPS will be discussed.”

    “The purpose of this article is to explain how relativistic effects are accounted for in the GPS. Although clock velocities are small and gravitational fields are weak near the earth, they give rise to significant relativistic effects. These effects include first- and second-order Doppler frequency shifts of clocks due to their relative motion, gravitational frequency shifts, and the Sagnac effect due to earth’s rotation. If such effects are not accounted for properly, unacceptably large errors in GPS navigation and time transfer will result. In the GPS one can find many examples of the application of fundamental relativity principles. These are worth careful study. Also, experimental tests of relativity can be performed with GPS, although generally speaking these are not at a level of precision any better than previously existing tests.”

    GPS calculation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNSS_positioning_calculation
    includes relativistic term, but no indication of relative significance.

    Also: http://www.stanson.ch/files/GPS/Vol%2028_16.pdf. =>

    GPS AND RELATIVITY: AN ENGINEERING OVERVIEW Henry F. Fliegel and Raymond S. DiEsposti GPS Joint Program Offlce

    • Replies: @ivan
  438. Biff says:
    @Mick Jagger gathers no mosque

    Real historians know your sex change has everyone confused.

  439. @S

    why so few in the US North knew they also had had slaves.

    If you want to cause apoplexy in a yankee, just mention the fact that Sojourner Truth was born a slave in New York City.

  440. Fox says:
    @FB

    It would be of interest to know why in your opinion the global positioning system is depending on the theory of relativity; I think reality happens independent of theories. They are an attempt to give a sensible explanation for a group of phenomena with a relatively simple set of rules which are also derived from mindful considerations of observations. A theory is accorded that status only as long as there are no contradictions or failures. Is the “theory of relativity” free of such contradictions?
    The experiment from 1971 you are referring to was from (I think) Haefele and Keating (?), and if I remember correctly, they set out with the intent to find a clock effect, however, failed to extract a statistically interpretable result from their travel around the world with their clock.
    The “theory of relativity” has as its special feature that not confessing loyalty and swearing fealty to it might cost one one’s job, career and reputation, even if data to cast doubt on Einsteinianism is based on laboratory measurements.

  441. anonimo11 says:
    @Ivan

    Yes, continuous synchronization is key for the system to work. I just wanted to point out what were, initially, the largest errors in the system.

  442. anonimo11 says:
    @FB

    I regret that I do not have the Lorentz work in front of me. I assume it was within establishing the (relativistically invariant) formulation of the electromagnetic force (also called the Lorentz force). For that, you have to effectively derive all workings of relativity, as the electric and magnetic fields have more complex transformations being elements of a tensor (these transforms are related but not equal to the Lorentz transformations). Effectively, if you can derive the Lorentz force, all of special relativity is already embedded in your work. The Lorentz transform only transforms 4-vectors, but he was evidently able to transform also tensors.

    • Replies: @FB
  443. Jimby says:

    As I enjoy my (retired) life as a part-time keyboard warrior, I often think of my WW2-generation father. In his retirement, he had no internet to inform him of surprising things like the Einstein fraud described above. Yes, his generation had books, magazines, newspapers, t.v. & radio — but those (((media))) obviously ignored many important subjects. My dad was working class, but university-educated, yet I remember his 1980’s-era retirement consisted only of hour after hour of network television. How much luckier I feel to be retired in the internet age.

    • Replies: @FB
  444. ivan says:
    @Tim too

    In the second paper you linked by Fliegel and DiEsposito, the authours seem to be making the point that no further relativistic corrections are needed to improve the accuracy of GPS to 6 metres.

    From the introduction :
    In this paper, we compare the predictions of relativity to those of intuitive, classical, Newtonian physics; we show how large or small the differences are, and how and for what applications those difference are large enough to make it necessary to correct the formulas of classical physics.

    they conclude :
    Except for the leading (gamma) factor, it is the same as the formula derived in classical physics for the signal travel time from the GPS satellite to the ground station. As we have shown, introducing the (gamma) factor makes a change of only 2 or 3 millimeters to the classical result. In short, there are no “missing relativity terms.” They cancel out.

    By classical result I presume they mean that from Newtonian physics. They are a giving a difference of only 2 or 3 millimetres when the relativistic corrections are included. What’s going on here?

    This paper according to the gentlemen is for the edification of receiver device manufacturers. On the other hand the standard engineering textbooks all either ignore them or quote the relativistic results in a page or so, only to ignore them later. One would have thought that an effect that can cause a whooping 11km difference a day would merit further discussion. But no, it is treated like an elderly relative brought down from the attic for form’s sake only to be banished later as an embarrassment.

    There is no mention of relativistic effects in
    a) Global Positioning Systems, Inertial Navigation, and Integration
    by Grewal, Weill and Andrews
    2) GPS and Galileo by Medizabal, et al

    Some others mention relativistic effects in passing but dismiss them as insignificant.
    3) Fundamentals of GPS Receivers by Dan Dobestein

    Another set of writers claim that relativistic corrections are all important but the corrections
    all seem to be be corrections in the Doppler effect, too small to measure as the satellites are
    lumbering beasts when compared to the speed of light.
    4) GPS Theory, algorithms and applications by Guochang Xu

    My point has been that the various relativity theories have no bearing on the accuracy of the GPS system one way or another.

    • Thanks: Fox
    • Replies: @FB
  445. FB says: • Website
    @Jimby

    More meaningless gibberish…[although I note you do not dispute any of the facts I have brought forth…]

    But go and have a look at the website your buddy ‘ivan’ the retard pointed us to…I would be interested in getting your reaction to this…

    Alternative Physics: Where Science Makes Sense

    And that same site’s ‘article’ about how relativity is unnecessary for GPS…

    GPS, Relativity, and pop-Science Mythology

    These are your fellow-travelers my friend…maybe you can talk about some of these ‘alternative’ physics with your ‘colleagues’ at CERN next time your are doing particle experiments…?

    • Replies: @anonimo11
  446. FB says: • Website
    @ivan

    they conclude :

    Except for the leading (gamma) factor, it is the same as the formula derived in classical physics for the signal travel time from the GPS satellite to the ground station.

    Do you know how to read, IDIOT…?

    What do you think the word ‘EXCEPT’ means to 99.9 percent of non-retarded humans…?

    The gamma factor, aka Lorentz factor is precisely what is used in relativity corrections…

    The Lorentz factor or Lorentz term is the factor by which time, length, and relativistic mass change for an object while that object is moving.

    The expression appears in several equations in special relativity, and it arises in derivations of the Lorentz transformations.


    If you actually knew the very first thing about physics and could understand what is written in that paper you would realize that your ignorant takeaway from this TECHNICAL paper is completely retarded…

    It’s like saying the world is actually square EXCEPT for its round shape…

    I asked you already to STOP polluting this thread with your ignorant outbursts…go and actually learn something, take some night school classes to advance your education at least a little bit, before spouting off about things which you know NOTHING…

    • Agree: Jazman
    • Troll: Ivan
  447. FB says: • Website
    @anonimo11

    My comment here should have been addressed to you…

    • Replies: @anonimo11
  448. Vojkan says:
    @ivan

    “Supposing that the satellites are at geostationary orbit at 36,000 km” – they aren’t, they circle around the Earth at an altitude of 20200 km and at a speed of ~14000 km/h. Making the supposed necessary corrections even more ridiculous.

    • Thanks: Ivan
    • Replies: @a_german
    , @ivan
  449. Einstein published three seminal papers in 1905, eg about the light photon, and 20th century physicists accepted them as innovative and important: I believe none of them took the view of the author of this paper.
    On the subject of Edison, I believe he believed he was the first to ‘make a machine speak’ and the Scientific American offices who listened to it and published their report accepted that his phonograph was quite original.
    Yes Swann did get his light bulb to light up in Scotland slightly before Edison, and they then formed a partnership: but i never heard what is here claimed, that Swann was the first to make a phonograph.

  450. a_german [AKA "a__German"] says:
    @FB

    Then, by all means, go ahead and EXPLAIN it for us…

    Why, it’s already known. In opposite, please explain what mass equivalation has to do with “timedilation”.

    And while you’re at it, go right ahead and EXPLAIN to us the difference between a formula and an equation…

    A formula is something out of the chemical science or the alchemist area. An equation is pure math. Maybe this is different in english or american english. Me is native German, over here these are different definitions. Even when in every day language this is confused too.

    • LOL: FB
  451. a_german [AKA "a__German"] says:
    @Vojkan

    “Supposing that the satellites are at geostationary orbit at 36,000 km” – they aren’t, they circle around the Earth at an altitude of 20200 km and at a speed of ~14000 km/h. Making the supposed necessary corrections even more ridiculous.

    And the lesser gravitation (or Raumverzerrung) counteracts against the speed induced time dilation.

    But there is one more thing in relativity. Speed is a one dimensional -let’s say- vector. But sattelites acts in a 3 dimensional world (at minimum). The observer on Earth sees a different speed than the sattelite haunting around earth. Between all the sattelites are totally different speeds, partly the double, partly near zero. But never the same.

    An observer from mars sees zero speed difference to earth orbit in average.

    How will this poor theory handle all this “relativity” without getting headaches?

    • Replies: @Ivan
  452. anonimo11 says:
    @FB

    here where? I clciked and nothing happened.

    • Replies: @FB
  453. Tim too says:

    And another reference to large errors propagating rapidly in the absence of relativistic corrections:

    https://physicstoday.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/1.1485583

    “…Suppose one wanted to improve GPS spatial precision so that receiver positions could be determined with an uncertainty of only a centimeter. A radio wave travels 1 cm in 0.03 ns. So one would have to account for all temporal relativistic effects down to a few hundredths of a nanosecond. But the second-order Doppler shift of an orbiting atomic clock, if it were not taken into account, would cause an error this large to build up in less than half a second. An effect of comparable size is contributed by the gravitational blueshift, which results when a photon—or a clock—moves to lower altitude. If these relativistic effects were not corrected for, satellite clock errors building up in just one day would cause navigational errors of more than 11 km, quickly rendering the system useless.”

    Has anyone refuted this? That is, in a published peer reviewed journal.

    • Replies: @mikemikev
  454. Tim too says:

    And here is a thread containing calculations, where the 11 km comes from:, https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/1061/why-does-gps-depend-on-relativity

    “…
    Error margin for position predicted by GPS is 15m. So GPS system must keep time with accuracy of at least 15m/𝑐 which is roughly 50ns.

    So 50ns error in timekeeping corresponds to 15m error in distance prediction.
    Hence, for 38μs error in timekeeping corresponds to 11km error in distance prediction.

    If we do not apply corrections using GR to GPS then 38μs error in timekeeping is introduced per day.

    You can check it yourself by using following formulas

    𝑇1=𝑇01−𝑣2𝑐2√

    …clock runs relatively slower if it is moving at high velocity.

    𝑇2=𝑇01−2𝐺𝑀𝑐2𝑅√

    …clock runs relatively faster because of weak gravity.

    𝑇1 = 7 microseconds/day

    𝑇2 = 45 microseconds/day

    𝑇2−𝑇1 = 38 microseconds/day

    use values given in this very good article. (see reference link above)

    And for equations refer to HyperPhysics. (see reference link above)

    So Stephen Hawking is right! 🙂

    • Replies: @Ivan
  455. S says:
    @dearieme

    Look too at the idiocy of discussing slavery by pretending that unskilled labourers are “wage slaves” and therefore slaves.

    Rather than entering the realm of ad hominem you might look at what was actually said, at least on my part.

    Like many, myself included at one time, and no doubt in large part due to heavy propagandization, you mistake slavery itself with historic stereotypical outer characteristics of one classical type, chattel, ie a raggedly clothed person in chains, and sometimes being of a particular race or ethnicity. While most chattel slaves were performing unskilled labor, some of these enslaved persons were skilled, and performed skilled labor, and, were often allotted special rights and privileges (relatively speaking) for doing so.

    [MORE]

    The financial essence of ‘slavery’ itself is simply the systematic theft of the value of an individual’s labor. The term before it such as ‘chattel’ (via as physical property), ‘sex’ (via a woman’s sexuality), or ‘wage’, (via a person’s pay, ie their ‘wages’) is simply the descriptor of the means of the theft.

    Note, when I speak of wage slavery, I am speaking specifically of the so called ‘cheap labor’/’mass immigration’ phenomena, featuring ‘the immigrant’ which got started in a big way during the first half of the 19th century in certain of the Anglosphere countries, which not coincidentally as part and parcel of the British Empire just prior, had been dominating the Trans-Atlantic chattel slave trade.

    I am not speaking of generic wage labor which might be simply an occupation low in pay, in the way Marxist sorts often do and thereby much abuse the term. However, it’s the best term for what I’m attempting to say, so I use it.

    One might say of the ‘immigrants’ that ‘they come freely, without coercion’. There’s lying by omission in this claim and taking out of context.

    It would be the same if someone had a short minute long film they showed of one person appearing to ‘freely’ give another hundreds of dollars in cash. They don’t tell people the film had originally been two minutes long, the first minute which has been cut out showing the person receiving the cash beating the said ‘freely giving’ other person over the head with a two by four. You add the two films together and the true picture of stiff armed robbery comes plainly into view.

    Similarly with the Chinese to this very day. It was only after China had been first flooded with drugs, and then crushed militarily with the first (of two) Opium Wars during the first half of the 19th century, that a mass exodus of Chinese to the Western United States began.

    Regarding the Irish, it was after centuries of British subjugation, topped off by coercion involving the Irish Famine, that the mass exodus of the Irish to the United States really got going. Rather than restrict exports of foodstuffs during the Famine, as past famines had been dealt with, now worshiped ‘free trade’ was allowed to reign supreme, and the desperately needed food was exported from Ireland.

    British landlords in Ireland ‘helped’ their starving and often in financial arrears Irish tenants by paying their way to leave Ireland to the United States to be wage slaves (ie so called ‘cheap labor’) in apparently fairly great numbers, most of these ‘immigrants’ never to see Ireland again.

    As documented by the The Spectator of London, the Irish didn’t see this as ‘help’, but instead, seeing it as an act of genocidal hostility towards them, called it ‘extermination’. Member(s) of the British aristocracy in Ireland were being assassinated for promoting this scheme. [The London Times during this same Famine era entirely concurred with the Irish assessment of this matter, declaring that the Irish people would be ‘known no more’ as a direct result of their mass exodus to the US. See my archives.]

    ‘Such is the conduct which the Irish incendiaries name “extermination.”‘

    The Spectator (Nov 20, 1847) – Extermination and Vengeance

    The case of Mr. Ormsby Gore is very instructive. The Irish papers, alluding to his estate of Leganommer, had a terrific story of “extermination in Leitrim,” full of direct falsehoods. Setting aside smaller matters, it appears that the tenants on the estate owed rent for several years, in some instances for as many as twelve or fourteen; one year’s rent was demanded, under pain of a twelvemonth’s notice to quit; not a shilling of rent was offered, and the notice was enforced, but the enforcement was accompanied with a declaration that those who could not retain their holdings would be aided by their landlord to emigrate to America. Such is the conduct which the Irish incendiaries name “extermination.” It is well, in the approaching debates, that the Irish meaning of that word should be understood.

    It’s not a dissimilar situation when you examine the other ‘immigrant groups’ in their historic context.

    The highly respected 19th century US economist, and purported Lincoln economic adviser, Henry Charles Carey, said exactly what I am saying when he declared in 1853:

    “It [‘cheap labor’] is the slave trade of the last century reproduced on a grander scale…”

    Or, was this also ‘idiocy’ on Carey’s part?

    First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win.

    http://archive.spectator.co.uk/article/20th-november-1847/12/extermination-and-vengeance

    https://majorityrights.com/weblog/comments/slavery_on_a_grander_scale

  456. mikemikev says:
    @Tim too

    Nobody sensible disputes time dilation. The question is whether Einstein or Lorentz came up with it. (Hint Lorentz)

    • Replies: @FB
  457. FB says: • Website
    @mikemikev

    The uneducated idiots just keep going and going…

    Lorentz ahead of Einstein…?

    That’s less common sense than I would expect from a barn animal nonchalantly dropping a big old pasture patty on the floor…

    Look up luminiferous ether, fool…

    Does such a thing exist…?

    Yet Lorentz and Poincare and all these other clowns until Einstein had to assume that waves could only travel through a medium like this nonexistent ether, because that was the only way they could make the math work, after Maxwell’s electromagnetism…

  458. Dannyboy says:
    @ivan

    Excellent post here as well your previous posts to this retarded windbag sack of shit, “FB” ( Fuck Boy?..lol)

    Thank you, sir.

    • Thanks: Ivan
  459. @mikemikev

    The 1905 paper “On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies” contains a partial reformulation of physics mentioned above. This was followed up by other papers including the famous mass-energy equivalence.

    The papers are difficult for somebody to follow in their original form today. If you want to see for yourself, one can do no better than study the Feynman lectures on physics.

    https://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/

  460. @Rev. Spooner

    By what you have stated, I then take it for granted that you agree that one can tweak patented products and register it or them as a the new product.
    I fully agree with you.
    America doesn’t and as a world power, arm twists others and prevents them from doing it. See the contradiction?

  461. chuckywiz says:
    @FB

    Hey Professor Forest Gump (you are physics man according to your resume which always a perfect document). Dont try to impress the public by others derivations and pretending you have full handle on it. I have worked with folks like you. Legend in your own mind.

    First you could not convince me about your hero Einstein theory of relativity. E=mC2. Sounds and energy equation to me, Just like Planks equation. where is relativity fits in this equation. Just like D= Time and velocity and there you go again by bringing theory of relativity. Get a life. You gave me all that BS about GPS and avoided a direct answer on E=mC2. I change my mind when I get new information. Not BS

    BTW, this whole thing is theory and you are all that pumped up. My theory is God is Asian looking, prove me wrong.
    Einstein had a problem understanding entanglement and string theory.

    Regarding your GPS BS. If you go to Uzbekistan and visit a museum in Tashkand (no Uzbekistan is not next to Wyoming, use your GPS), you could see a clock which was based on sun and starts location back in 10 or 11 century (during the era of Tamur Lang). The Clock is off only six seconds from the atomic clock. This method was developed 800 years ago, Thank goodness Einstein did not learn about that method other wise, who know.

    Now your grandmother did not teach you mannerism that is why you feel good calling people names. You did not dare to call me anything yet. Go ahead make my day. But here is my way to put you in your place.

    Next time you have oral sex with a male elephant, make sure you use organic wax not petroleum Jelly that may trigger your cold sore. I am looking forward your reply. I dare you.

    • Thanks: annamaria
    • Replies: @Anonymous
  462. @Vojkan

    I want to address the assertion that Albert Einstein was worthless at math.

    Einstein was in fact very competent at math, well above average and he never failed math. What Einstein wasn’t so good at was tedious, laborious calculation which today we would almost always rely on a computer to do. He relied on his wife to help him with checking his math. Einstein was thoroughly versed in Euclidean geometry (synthetic with proofs), Analysis (high octane calculus with proofs) and Differential geometry (the math underlying General Relativity). Einstein doubtlessly was well versed in topology, abstract algebra, linear algebra, manifolds, statistics and probability. Einstein taught Statistical Mechanics at Princeton and was an expert in this highly mathematical field.

    There’s a difference between Pure Mathematics and careful calculation. Einstein was excellent at the former but not so good at the latter. He probably wouldn’t have been a good cashier despite his math ability.

    One of the greatest mathematicians of this past century Grotendieck who along with Artin pioneered new techniques in algebraic geometry made the casual mistake of referring to 51 as a prime number. His blunder is memorialized as the “Grotendieck Prime”.

    • Replies: @Gianni in Guernsey
  463. mikemikev says:
    @FB

    I think your obnoxious tone says a lot about the strength of your position.

    • Replies: @FB
  464. Anonymous[339] • Disclaimer says:
    @Sya Beerens

    And they lived happily ever after……..

    and half of them died their first winter . . .
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Mayflower_passengers_who_died_in_the_winter_of_1620%E2%80%9321

  465. gavishti says:
    @Bombercommand

    I don’t know much about aeroplanes but I liked the way you handled ” vot tak “.

    Wouldn’t be much surprised where his ‘vaunted talking’ comes from 😆😅

  466. FB says: • Website
    @mikemikev

    FACTS don’t require any kind of ‘position’ doofus…

  467. chuckywiz says:
    @FB

    So you got a piece of paper called a degree and that gave you the right to claim yourself smart.. Like I mentioned in my earlier notes to you that you are no different than other PhDs I had dealt with and some ot them worked for me. A bunch of Egomaniacs.
    Truth hurts. Stay calm. Read Planks stuff. Visit his institute in Berlin you may learn something.
    E=mC2 keep jerking.

  468. ivan says:
    @Vojkan

    There is a further point I have to make viz, the Einstein dingle berries make the implied claim that without Einstein we would be lost at sea it comes to understanding the incredible difficulties that atomic clocks on board satellites face in reconciling time dilation with respect to atomic clocks on the ground. But that is in fact a simple consequence of A or O Level physics. Something we would all have learned by paying attention in class, or like Fred Reed go around with a pencil and notebook in hand later in life .

    The atomic clock stripped to its essentials is an oscillator. The simplest model of an oscillator
    is the pendulum.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pendulum

    From the wiki article above (Equation 1) :
    Period of Pendulum (T) is approximately 2 x pi x sqaure root of ( L / g), that is the
    period of the clock is of the order square root of (1 / g) , or in words T increases as g decreases.

    Now the factor g, the acceleration due to gravity is known (from our high school physics days ) to decrease with height. A satellite is high up in the sky, its g will be lower and hence the time period of the pendulum (or atomic) clock will of necessity increase. Therefore there is a need for corrections according to the design of the GPS. But is this so difficult to understand under Newtonian physics? Instead we have the dingle berries proclaiming that this is another proof of the genius of Einstein.

    Not the least of the damage that Einstein worship has done is the destructive effect it has on basic physical and geometric intuition.

    The article below makes the same point in a more sophisticated way, no Einsteinian hookey-pookey is necessary.

    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1674984718301307

    see Equation 19, the relationship between the energy of an oscillator and its other parameters.

    • Replies: @Vojkan
  469. chuckywiz says:
    @FB

    Read my post 477 on time. All this fancy simulation does not convey anything to a simple mind or an idiot (your words) like me.

  470. chuckywiz says:
    @Ivan

    Thanks for your explanation in simple language. Not like F.B who ever he is, But sure a legend in his own mind. He keeps throwing his derivations at the speed of light. And becomes at time abusive. This legend has yet to answer my simple question about the equation E=mC2, where is the relativity in this equation? it is just a theory. And people are worshiping it like in the old days they used to worship idols as gods.

    It is funny that you brought something that I had been saying for a long time. Einstein, as a patent clerk had all the time to read other people’s work and coming up with a refined product because of diversified input. I dont have any problem with Einstein but this over hype makes me wonder. My older brother is fan of Einstein. He bought so many books on Einstein (dont know if he finished even a single one). Thanks. I learned something

    • Replies: @Ivan
    , @Ultrafart the Brave
  471. Vojkan says:
    @ivan

    Yep, it’s a matter of clocks ticking at a different pace and not a matter of time flowing slower or faster, which seems so bloody logical and intuitive without any relativistic esotericism. The second link in your comment explains it beautifully. But hey, who are we to interfere with people’s religious beliefs?

    • Agree: Ivan
  472. anonimo11 says:
    @FB

    Last one because i am getting too busy. The group that governs transformations is the Lorentz group (in its complete form, irrelevant here, the Poincare’ group). These guys had already correctly transformed physical quantities belonging to tensors, before Einstein, not just 4-vectors. And the reason why they did it right is that they were all starting from Michelson Morley, who had shown no variation of the speed of light during half of a Earth’s orbit, implying no ether.

    But the incredible thing, the one that shows how brain-washed FB is (and i think he has the skills to find out for himself), is that once the Lorentz transformations (just for space time) are proven to be exact, time dilation, length contraction, and addition of velocities can be derived readily. The last two derivations are particularly simple and could even be done in an Unz comment (the first needs the construction of a gedanken experiment, a ray of light bouncing between two mirrors, first studied by Poincare’), but it is addition of velocities that matter, since it was turned into a principle.

    So if one does addition of velocities, just from the Lorentz transform, he finds that if one of the velocities is c, the final velocity is c. That, in other words, you can add any velocity to c and you get c. That is in the equations, right there, and obtained long before Einstein, and of course in full agreement with Michelson Morley.

    But it was not verbalized, and no pomp and circumstance such as defining the corollary of the transform a principle. Once you verbalize it, you state that the speed of light is the same in every frame, since the transform gives you c regardless. But verbalization does not change any of the math that was already in place. I think the hardest part was to find the transform(s), and the invariants…

    • Thanks: annamaria
    • Replies: @FB
  473. @Bombercommand

    Did the April 1970 Apollo 13 mission end just minutes after it began?

    April 1970: NASA launches Apollo 13, but apparently it aborts
    only minutes later – an emergency splashdown in the eastern Atlantic.
    The Soviets then recover an Apollo module that had “fallen from space”.
    But all is not lost. The US sends an icebreaker to a Russian port to bring home the lost Apollo module.
    Was this event the real Apollo 13 accident?

    Identity parade for the Apollo module nominated BP-1227

    We have been talking of this capsule as being an Apollo boilerplate (BP-1227), yet there is reasonable doubt as to whether this is the real identity of the returned module. However, as this is the description retained by those researching and discussing the Murmansk capsule exchange, for the sake of clarity across the sources, we retain the number – but with a caveat. At least as far as the public are concerned, no one knows to which outfit BP-1227 was assigned or on what Apollo mission, because the relevant documentation is either missing or has been destroyed. Researcher Eddie Pugh also came up against walls of silence even after requesting information via the US FOI Act.17

    Quite why this particular boilerplate should be so protected raises a legitimate observation, especially remembering the ‘accidental’ loss or destruction of other Apollo technology data.18 In the light of what we are discovering, was boilerplate BP-1227 simply the alias attributed to the Murmansk handover of the Apollo 13 CM?

    Here is the most concise telling of the recovery of so called BP-1227 you will find. Take a few minutes and learn a few little known facts.
    https://www.aulis.com/odyssey_apollo.htm

    • Replies: @Bombercommand
    , @FB
  474. @Bombercommand

    Did the April 1970 Apollo 13 mission end just minutes after it began?

    April 1970: NASA launches Apollo 13, but apparently it aborts
    only minutes later – an emergency splashdown in the eastern Atlantic.
    The Soviets then recover an Apollo module that had “fallen from space”.
    But all is not lost. The US sends an icebreaker to a Russian port to bring home the lost Apollo module.
    Was this event the real Apollo 13 accident?

    Identity parade for the Apollo module nominated BP-1227

    We have been talking of this capsule as being an Apollo boilerplate (BP-1227), yet there is reasonable doubt as to whether this is the real identity of the returned module. However, as this is the description retained by those researching and discussing the Murmansk capsule exchange, for the sake of clarity across the sources, we retain the number – but with a caveat. At least as far as the public are concerned, no one knows to which outfit BP-1227 was assigned or on what Apollo mission, because the relevant documentation is either missing or has been destroyed. Researcher Eddie Pugh also came up against walls of silence even after requesting information via the US FOI Act.17

    Quite why this particular boilerplate should be so protected raises a legitimate observation, especially remembering the ‘accidental’ loss or destruction of other Apollo technology data.18 In the light of what we are discovering, was boilerplate BP-1227 simply the alias attributed to the Murmansk handover of the Apollo 13 CM?

    Here is the most concise telling of the recovery of so called BP-1227 you will find. Take a few minutes and learn a few little known facts.
    https://www.aulis.com/odyssey_apollo.htm

  475. Anonymous[339] • Disclaimer says:

    As I understand it, most of the inventions of the 1930s through 1950 were made by an Irishman, Patrick Pending. Not only that, but the inventions were clearly marked with “Pat. Pending”. Yet he is seldom mentioned in the literature, and I’ve been unable to find much about him — just a few short stories.
    Much the same could be said about the scholarship of Ibid. Ibid is often mentioned in the literature, but as far as I can tell, no biographical information is available.

    • Replies: @Prajna
  476. @Johnny Walker Read

    That goofy article’s only redeeming feature is that it shows many photos of BP-1227. It is plainly obvious that that is not a real Apollo Command Module.

    • Agree: Wizard of Oz
  477. FB says: • Website
    @anonimo11

    More gibberish…

    Look, you are very busy building a huge strawman about the Lorentz and others’ contribution to time dilation and other things…

    But they were WRONG about the key piece of the entire thing…the need for a so-called luminiferous ether…which of course doesn’t exist and was only proven so by Einstein’s very original and profound insight about relativity…

    The negative outcome of the Michelson–Morley experiment (1887) suggested that the aether did not exist, a finding that was confirmed in subsequent experiments through the 1920s.

    Between 1892 and 1904, Hendrik Lorentz developed an electron-aether theory, in which he introduced a strict separation between matter (electrons) and aether.

    Aether theory was dealt another blow when the Galilean transformation and Newtonian dynamics were both modified by Albert Einstein’s special theory of relativity, giving the mathematics of Lorentzian electrodynamics a new, “non-aether” context.[A 18]

    Unlike most major shifts in scientific thought, special relativity was adopted by the scientific community remarkably quickly, consistent with Einstein’s later comment that the laws of physics described by the Special Theory were “ripe for discovery” in 1905.[B 10]

    But even after Einstein’s relativity put the ether nonsense to restr for good, Lorentz in fact continued flogging this dead horse…

    Lorentz on his side continued to use the aether hypothesis. In his lectures of around 1911, he pointed out that what “the theory of relativity has to say … can be carried out independently of what one thinks of the aether and the time”.

    He commented that “whether there is an aether or not, electromagnetic fields certainly exist, and so also does the energy of the electrical oscillations” so that, “if we do not like the name of ‘aether’, we must use another word as a peg to hang all these things upon”.

    The bottom line is that Lorentz and Poincaré were wrong about very BASIC things, like the true nature of time and this nonexistent ether…they did not come u with the physical framework that is relativity..

    [Poincaré] corrected some mistakes of Lorentz and proved the Lorentz covariance of the electromagnetic equations.

    However, he used the notion of an aether as a perfectly undetectable medium and distinguished between apparent and real time, so most historians of science argue that he failed to invent special relativity.[B 7][B 9][B 3]

    It was Einstein that got it right and put everything in that puzzle together…

    By what you have said here, and how poorly you articulate your thoughts, it seems fantastic to believe you are what you claim to be, an academic working in particle physics…

    • Troll: Ivan
  478. At the risk of displaying technical incompetence, can anyone tell me why on my computer all the buttons (for reply, agree . .) disappear each day. And clicking on “Why?” (on Remember my Information) does nothing. And the home page’s central column of Columnists is there one day and gone the next.

    Is this personal to me, or do others have this experience?

    • Replies: @Ivan
  479. Ivan says:
    @Tim too

    Thank you. I have moved beyond that a little. I can now show a similar effect using nothing more than classical physics and some handwaving :

    The acceleration due to gravity is
    g = ( G * M ) / R*2.
    The factor ( G * M) — G the gravitational constant and M the mass of the Earth –is a constant. Hence g is of the order of 1/(R*2) or in words g falls off as the second power of the radius. The radius of the orbit of a satellite at 20,000 km is when compared to the radius of the Earth 6,371 km is about 3 times. Hence the acceleration due to gravity is about 9 times less ( recall 1/R*2) )

    Therefore since the tick rate of the atomic clock increases at. 3 times the change in g. See the discussion on the pendulum above T ~ squareroot( 1/g ). Or in numbers the change in T the period with respect to an atomic clock on Earth is squareroot( 1/ g at orbit )

    Or period of atomic oscillator in orbit ~ squareroot( 1/9 ) . In other words the atomic clock in orbit runs 3 times slower than on the Earth.

    But there is old Lorentz – Fitzgerald effect to take into account . How so?

    The rapidity v/c is the factor that has to appear in any correction. v is 14,000 km/hr for the satellite. c is 300,000 km/s. The factor v/c is then 1.30 X 10^(-5), where ^ is to be read “to the power of”.

    If we form the factor

    3 X 1.30^(-5) x 300,000

    Where 3 is time period of an atomic clock in orbit with respect to one on Earth as derived above , the second factor the rapidity and the last the speed of light we get 11.7 km. I am sure I can justify this figure of 11.7 km , but you get the picture : No Einstienian prestidigitation is necessary.

    • Replies: @FB
    , @Tim too
    , @Tim too
  480. Ivan says:
    @a_german

    And don’t forget the Solar System is spinning round the centre of the Milky Way and the Milky Way is just one galaxy among countless spinning at our galactic neighbourhood at awesome speeds so we should be getting heavier according to observer X something at centre of our galactic neighbourhood. And further contend with observer Y at the edge of the Universe who is happy that as we are moving away from him we are getting even more heavier. How are we ever to carry around our poor selves. Are we missing old Ptolemy with his equants and epicycles yet?

  481. Ivan says:
    @chuckywiz

    I am one those who respect Einstein’s work on what is called the Old Quantum Theory and statistical physics. Einstein was a master at using Planck’s quantum to explain many disparate phenomena. His work on population inversion in quantum terms is one of the theoretical bases of the laser. But that was before fellows like Schrodinger appeared with their newer quantum mechanics. His work on space and time on the other hand in the long run served only to confuse matters, destroy intuition, raised the bar for physics by introducing Riemannian Geometry that few would want to touch in tensorial terms. He further destroyed philosophical cogitation on space and making it a handmaiden of tensor calculus, so that one cannot talk about these matters without tumbling over curved spacetime as though it was something real rather than just a mathematical convenience.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  482. @Reg Cæsar

    Only two? You showed four: Rome, Japan, Korea, Britain.
    And what do Simon and Huxter say about “israel?

  483. Ivan says:
    @Larry Romanoff

    I have the same problem. I can use the buttons again only after I post a comment. It looks like some sophisticated cookie operation in the browser is clearing the permissions at the end of the day.

  484. @Twodees Partain

    Are you joking? What do you say about this from http://www.history.com

    The United States would go on to complete six crewed missions to the moon that landed a total of 12 astronauts (all men) from 1969 to 1972 in a series of Apollo missions numbering up to Apollo 17.Jun 12, 2019

  485. @Ivan

    My physics never got to the level of four dimensional space-time but I am sure that I have read of experiments or measurements that showed that space-time was bent by the gravitational pull of large bodies (the sun, from memory) so was indeed real and not just a convenient concept. Over to you.

    • Replies: @Ivan
  486. FB says: • Website
    @Johnny Walker Read

    Thanks for that interesting article…

    It’s hard to tell really what happened there and who is telling the truth, but the article does mention one important technical issue, which is that of the very high speed of atmospheric reentry on any spaceflight returning from the moon…

    To reach low earth orbit requires a speed of about 8 kilometers per second, which is about 18,000 mph…to then escape earth’s gravity and fly to the moon requires about another 3 km/s on top of that…the returning spacecraft will be traveling at a speed of over 11 km/s, much higher than a return from earth orbit…

    Since spacecraft returning to earth’s atmosphere use atmospheric friction to slow down, huge heat loads are generated…we recall the the Shuttle Columbia disintegrated on reentry in 2003 due to several thermal protection system tiles being knocked off by FOAM INSULATION on the launch to space several days earlier…and that was at a reentry speed of less than 8 km/s, much lower than a moon return speed…

    In order to keep the heat loading on the spacecraft to tolerable limits, a moon return mission requires what is called a skip reentry…where the craft is maneuvered so as to literally bounce off the upper atmosphere, bleeding away velocity without incurring much heat load, and then making a second reentry at lower speed…

    The Apollo missions never actually performed a skip reentry, but simply a bounce, never actually leaving the atmosphere once entered…the Russian Luna and Zond missions did, as did the Chinese Chang’e 5 unmanned moon mission…

    And therein lies a big technical mystery…how was the Apollo Command module able to survive the massive heat loads without a skip reentry…?

    Thermal protection systems on spacecraft are usually designed to burn away, technically called ‘ablative’ coatings using advanced materials…the broad surface of the craft is designed for aero-braking in the atmosphere, in order to slow the craft down using air resistance…by burning away, these ablative systems conduct the heat away from the vulnerable metal structure of the craft, which would simply burn up at these temperatures…

    Thermal management is one of the most challenging aspects of spaceflight and employs the most technologically advanced solutions involving shock layer gas physics…things get very hairy very quickly as speed increases above the approximately 8 km/s of low earth orbit reentry…

    Not just due to the exponential increase in heat load, but due to the chemical thermodynamics of gases and how they dissociate at high temperatures [molecules and even individual atoms literally fall apart, spinning off electrons in the process]…for instance, the so-called ‘five species’ model is used for speeds of LEO reentry…but at higher speeds the shock layer contains significant amounts of ionized nitrogen and oxygen, and the five spcies model is no longer accurate [a 12 species model is required to even model a heat load on paper…]

    Basically what it adds up to is that the reentry of the Apollo Command module would have been a huge technological problem at the time…there has been huge progress in the intervening decades…the fact that the Apollo didn’t even perform a skip reentry raises a very legitimate question of just how those massive thermal loads would have been managed…

    Ablative heat shield (after use) on Apollo 12 capsule

    The problem of heat loading is so huge, that new spacecraft for beyond earth orbit missions, like the proposed Orion are being planned for multiple skip reentry…

    The fact is that heat shielding technology is really operating at the limit even with LEO reentry…

    And here is another application of the skip re-entry, the intercontinental hypersonic boost-glide vehicle, which the Russians have now fielded with the Avangard missile…

    This is a multiple-skip flight path, similar to a flat pebble bouncing over the surface of a pond…it was first proposed during WW2 by German scientist Eugen Sanger, for the Amerika bomber that could reach New York…however, his calculations for heat load were way off the mark and this type of vehicle has only now after more than seven decades become a reality with the Avangard…

    The bottom line is that the partial skip entry of the Apollo module seems very suspect from a technical perspective…

    • Replies: @Bombercommand
  487. Anonymous[339] • Disclaimer says:
    @chuckywiz

    You aren’t doing your bit for White supremacy, you know. Nor Left supremacy.

  488. 499.Ivan says:

    I have the same problem. I can use the buttons again only after I post a comment. It looks like some sophisticated cookie operation in the browser is clearing the permissions at the end of the day.

    Many thanks. 🙂

    • Replies: @Ivan
  489. @A Competent Physicist

    Or Mary Jackson and the other hidden figures women. Maybe holly wood could make anothe film about tedious calculations. It would be pure Oscar bathe without Weinstein around.

  490. Ahoy says:

    The biggest fraud in American history is Lincoln. The first President that kept in close contact with Karl Marx through intensive correspondence. He was the first President to brake the Constitution by declaring war against the thirteen states of the South.

    The South did nothing illegal. They left the Union according to the provisions signed and existing in the original document. Lincoln declared a genocidal war against the South because he wanted to re-write the Union to his Marxist view.

    He succeeded and now America is going through its last gasps because this is the way bolshevism ends up.

    All Americans that feel a sense of pride and deeply feel the value of free speech must see this video.

    • Agree: Dennis Gannon
    • Troll: vot tak
  491. Truth says:

    One FBI file labeled “Secret”, stated that Einstein was affiliated with 33 organisations which had been cited by the Attorney-General and/or Congress, as being politically suspect.

    How many?

  492. Ivan says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    First of all Oz one has to enquire as to the ontological status of spacetime. That is, is it something real in the sense that we can touch, see or smell like a football field or is it just a convenient mathematical object. I don’t ascribe any reality to it apart from a convenient mathematical abstraction. Spaces of all kinds abound in physics. For example in classical mechanics when Newton’s equations are formulated in the Lagrangian form, the action takes place in a 6-dimensional space for just one particle. But hardly anyone says that 6-D space is more real than the 3-D space in which we see the particle moving around. It is a mathematical abstraction. Here too one can see the “path” of the particles parameters through configuration space – the proper name of Lagrangian space – bend, curve and so on . We can even imagine the entire Lagrangian space embedded in a higher dimensional space , whereupon it becomes a manifold that can be subjected to curvature and torsion. But so what ? It doesn’t therefore become more real than the actual movement of the particle in our space , the 3 dimensional space we live in. I consider the curvature of spacetime to be nothing more than a suggestive analogical representation as rubber sheet with which we are all familiar.

    There is another serious objection to the idea of a curvature of spacetime, which I summarize as follows : Does curvature of a 4 dimensional space make sense without it being embedded in a 5-dimensional space? And where then is this 5-dimensional space? To fix ideas imagine an ant walking around in a fixed direction on an apple. From this comes the idea of the Newton of the ants after going round and round the apple posits that that there is central core in the apple to which all the ants are attracted. He calls it gravitation. The Einstein of the ants calls that a superstition, an artifact of the curvature of the apple. There are no force keeping the ants on the surface . They are merely following a path on the surface. Well and good.

    In a standard textbook on relativity they will then go on to discuss how to measure the curvature of the apple by means of a derivative operator. The whole mathematical apparatus can be developed. But notice the problem. The skin of the apple is a 2-dimensional surface embedded in a 3-dimensional world. We can literally see the ants measuring the gradient of their paths as they map their surface. But would a similar operation be possible if the world was in fact 2 dimensional? It would seem then that a 2-dimensional surface has to be embedded in a 3-dimensional space for the notion of curvature to make sense. Where then is the 5-dimensional space that our supposed 4-dimensional spacetime lives in.

    • Agree: NobodyKnowsImADog
    • Thanks: Bombercommand
    • Replies: @NobodyKnowsImADog
  493. Many of the comments remind me of jobs, who never invented anything and in fact even stole from his so called partners. But he was great at stealing. He stole from everyone and changed it a little bit and added some color and spaz.. What vision?? the guy spent months making the apple logo and the colors to go with it. Thats his invention.. The apple pc? was junk compared to the commodore at the time and cost twice as much and did less. jobs created the next which cost like 20k.. well many workstations at the time also did similar things.. comes from having much faster processors and costlier chips in them like more memory. So people spend 1k to buy one of their phones.. While you can get better functionality for a $100 Chinese one.. But without the status.. tech idiots literally love apple.. they want to pay 5 times as much because they are too tech stupid to learn how to turn on the wifi and connect to a hotspot. Thats not innovation, thats called paying to be dumb and stupid… But in this world a lot of people pay to get stuff done because they dont know. Why are we not calling all those doers geniuses? At least some of the commentators did not talk about seeing the moon landing sites through their backyard telescope.. a physical impossibility with any telescope on earth. But just talking with a little knowledge and a lot of arrogance and a cowboy stance dont make it real.. even if authoritative and confidante..

  494. I’m not gonna call this article pure BS but it’s clear that the author applies way to much spin for his claims of historical accuracy to be taken seriously.

    I’m quite familiar with the early history of flight, and while very few aviation enthusiasts will ever deny the many contributions made before the Wright brothers, nearly all agree with the Wright’s basic claim to be the first to have achieved controlled, sustained motor flight.

    The airfoil is not commonly attributed to an Australian, but to Otto von Lilienthal. What the Wrights did (and claim to have done) is devise the calculations for a truly efficient airfoil. Inventors were previously working with bad formulas or simply following their intuition. That’s why people like Bleriot in France, who unlike the Wrights was actually a celebrity in the day, never managed to do all that much before starting their collaboration with the two brothers.

    If all the other subjects the author approaches are as well informed… all he does is advance the hokum in the opposite direction. And not in the least, the overly-rhetorical, empathic tone is more fit for a conspiratard rag than any serious writing on history.

  495. @FB

    The United States developed and tested the hypersonic glide vehicle before Russia, and powered it with a scram jet(Waverider Program), which the Russians don’t have, Avangard uses a standard ballistic missile. The United States made a successful accurate hit on a SW Pacific atoll from California with this baby. The scram jet project was put on standby as it is not fully developed and wasn’t needed…..yet. The Russians and Chinese merely copied the lift body from The United States and The United States was constrained by the IRBM treaty. Now that the Russians trashed the treaty and the Chinese ignored the principle, they are gonna see how things really get done. Regarding your blah blah blah about Apollo and reentry, the six Apollo landing sites are known and strewn with descent stages, lunar rovers and other items. Go phone up the Russians and Chinese and tell them to photo those sites ASAP. If there is nothing there they can humiliate The United States publicly. Should be a hoot.

    • Troll: vot tak
    • Replies: @FB
    , @Ivan
  496. FB says: • Website
    @Ivan

    The radius of the orbit of a satellite at 20,000 km is when compared to the radius of the Earth 6,371 km is about 3 times. Hence the acceleration due to gravity is about 9 times less ( recall 1/R*2) )

    WRONG…the acceleration due to gravity at that orbit would be about 17 times less, about 0.6 meters per second…

    Or period of atomic oscillator in orbit ~ squareroot( 1/9 ) . In other words the atomic clock in orbit runs 3 times slower than on the Earth.

    Completely WRONG again…the error is orders of magnitude smaller than that, measured only in microseconds, as has been pointed out many times already…

    But there is old Lorentz – Fitzgerald effect to take into account

    I already talked about the Lorentz factor in some detail, which you didn’t bother to read nor follow the links, so you throw up more retarded gibberish…nice…

    The Lorentz-Fitzgerald effect does not even apply to time dilation, which is the issue here…but to LENGTH CONTRACTION…

    Length contraction was postulated by George FitzGerald (1889) and Hendrik Antoon Lorentz (1892) to explain the negative outcome of the Michelson–Morley experiment and to rescue the hypothesis of the stationary aether (Lorentz–FitzGerald contraction hypothesis).[2][3]

    Again showing how wrong Lorentz was about what these observations really mean…

    Eventually, Albert Einstein (1905) was the first[4] to completely remove the ad hoc character from the contraction hypothesis, by demonstrating that this contraction did not require motion through a supposed aether, but could be explained using special relativity, which changed our notions of space, time, and simultaneity.[5]

    Einstein’s view was further elaborated by Hermann Minkowski, who demonstrated the geometrical interpretation of all relativistic effects by introducing his concept of four-dimensional spacetime.[6]

    You’re really quite the clown…completely uneducated about either math or physics, but insisting on popping off like a retarded four year old…

  497. Tim too says:
    @Ivan

    So looking solely at clock rate, nothing else, what will be the clock rate at 10 earth radii? 100 earth radii? 1000 earth radii? You appear to have come up with logic that results in clock rate being inversely proportional to distance from earth center? Is that so? You say , at ~ three earth radii,

    “Or period of atomic oscillator in orbit ~ squareroot( 1/9 ) . In other words the atomic clock in orbit runs 3 times slower than on the Earth. ”

    Is there anyone that believes that? Your theoretical approach gets the clock rate wrong at altitude.

    Atomic clock rate is dependent on a transition frequency, microwave or electronic. Atomic clocks don’t run slower at higher altitude, they run faster. That is experimentally observed.

    • Replies: @Ivan
  498. FB says: • Website
    @Bombercommand

    Stop polluting this thread with non-factual bullshit…

    The United States developed and tested the hypersonic glide vehicle before Russia, and powered it with a scram jet(Waverider Program), which the Russians don’t have

    The Russians are now producing a scramjet engine which powers the Zirkon missile, the first and ONLY usable production scramjet engine in the world…the Zirkon is currently being deployed to operational ships as a hypersonic, anti-ship cruise missile…

    That model is almost certainly not an accurate presentation of the Zirkon, since its shape is the key to its thermo-aerodynamic performance, it would be tightly guarded…

    Zircon is believed to be a maneuvering, winged hypersonic cruise missile with a lift-generating center body. A booster stage with solid-fuel engines accelerates it to supersonic speeds, after which a scramjet motor with liquid-fuel (Decilin [ru]) in the second stage accelerates it to hypersonic speeds.[11][19]

    They were also the first to fly a scramjet in 1991, the Kholod, and foolishly invited Nasa to participate in the flight testing [probably due to the fool Yeltsin]…the French were also invited…

    The first successful flight test of a scramjet was performed by the Soviet Union in 1991. It was an axisymmetric hydrogen-fueled dual-mode scramjet developed by Central Institute of Aviation Motors (CIAM), Moscow in the late 1970s.

    Then, from 1992 to 1998, an additional 6 flight tests of the axisymmetric high-speed scramjet-demonstrator were conducted by CIAM together with France and then with NASA.[6][7]

    Maximum flight velocity greater than Mach 6.4 was achieved and scramjet operation during 77 seconds was demonstrated.

    Recent Flight Test Results of the Joint CIAM-NASA Mach 6.5 Scramjet Flight Program

    I know all the details of this, many of which were not published, because I was working as a propulsion engineer for a Nasa contractor at the time…it was a huge technology transfer…

    Yet in the thirty years since then the US has been unable to field a working scramjet engine, despite this boost from Russian technology…btw, the waverider program was a series of experiments in the 2000s and has failed to produce a workable scramjet engine…

    As for your completely fictional ‘US hypersonic glide vehicle’…the US has never made such a flying object…

    A few months ago, the US announced that it was working on the first such ‘glide’ vehicle the C-HGB, which is a truck-launched rocket with a projected range of about 1,500 miles…this means it will get nowhere near orbital velocity, which is what is required to skip along the top of the atmosphere…

    The Pentagon’s Hypersonic Weapon System Passes a Critical Flight Test: The U.S. military is racing to catch up with China and Russia in developing hypersonic weapons.

    I have already commented on this missile elsewhere on this website…it is NOT any kind of skip reentry vehicle due to its suborbital speed…it is mostly an attempt to copy the Russian Iskander short-range missile, which can aerodynamically maneuver during its flight path…this is nothing new and goes back to the Scud and even the V2 before that…

    Comparing a boost-glide vehicle to this is like comparing bicycle to a Ferrari…

    China doesn’t have an intercontinental-range boost glide vehicle either, they are working on a intermediate-range glide vehicle, but it is not yet operationally deployed…the intercontinental-range Avangard is fully deployed and is an awesome achievement that makes every aerospace engineer’s eyes water…

    The US is nowhere in this technological contest…your completely uneducated eruptions notwithstanding…

    The Avangard is such a huge breakthrough that it is already recognized as a gamechanger in strategic power…since the US itself means that there is no current means of stopping it, nor even on the horizon…

    And btw, fool…a scramjet engine cannot be employed on an orbital vehicle since it is an air-breathing engine…therefore useless on a boost-glide vehicle…

    A scramjet engine is theoretically workable only to about Mach 10 or 15 at most, which is only about half the speed of orbital velocity of Mach 25…

    Farokhi, Aircraft Propulsion…

    We see that the upper speed limit of even a hydrogen-burning scramjet is though to be only about Mach 20 at most [and that is itself a matter of conjecture since it has never been demonstrated]…the only way to reach higher speeds is with a chemical rocket engine…

    • Thanks: Jazman
    • Replies: @vot tak
    , @Bombercommand
  499. Ranchpig says:

    Great Article.
    Took me hours to go thru the comments. It would seem that the responses tend to elicit some strong opinions and that’s because we’re committed to believing the lie. Stupid quote but probably apropos, “People would rather believe the lie than believe they’ve been lied to.” Also, it strikes me that the whole point of your article was indoctrination of an American bent, ie, American Dream/Ingenuity, etc. So you come along and question it and the “Faithful” scramble.

    To all you aviation “experts” out there, care to explain how planes fly in the first place? Oh wait, no one knows. Fact!!!! look it up. And don’t you dare say Bernouli, cause that’s absolute rubbish and any 6 year old can prove it with a paper airplane (no air foil) Otherwise how would a airfoil fly upside down…. whoops, they do all the time!!!!

    Sadly, the most overlook Slave trade was white Europeans. Millions of them, not speculation, not indentured servants either. Far more than either Chinese or Blacks.

    As for all our sacred Scientists… most are Saints in the Church of Scientism. A deliberate Cult meant to manipulate our “reality”. We see this in full display during the fake pandemic. We are so hubristic and fail to realize just how manipulated we have become. It’s built into the system. Not only with the Scientists but in our self smug “Knowledge” that we’re right about everything.

    Let’s not forget the enemies are those who want to control us through whatever means. Pretty sure we know who they are, let’s not help them.

  500. Tim too says:
    @Ivan

    Your theory appears to have the clock rate approach zero at large distance from earth. No one will buy.

    • Replies: @Ivan
  501. Ivan says:
    @Bombercommand

    The various archives of NASA stored in many places such as archive.org point to the incredible efforts put into the space programs. They also have materials on the Soviet programme. I don’t claim to have read or understood much if any of it. But one thing that stands out is that after making due allowances for national pride and bragging rights, the people working in the US and the USSR respected each other. They didn’t spend time claiming that the other side was faking it.

    I’ve read that sometime in the mid 60s the Soviets under Korolev realised that they didn’t have the the proper rocket configuration to take them to the moon and back and so decided to spend more effort on their Soyuz space station programme. But one thing they didn’t do was to harp on the impossibly of the Apollo programme under von Braun achieving the same. There were engineers and scientists all over the world who could have checked various aspects of it. But hardly anyone was making the point that Apollo couldn’t do it. I mean if the 1969 landing was a fake wouldn’t experts from Europe and Japan in addition to the Soviet Union have gone through with a toothcomb the subsequent flights and published it. Especially in Europe with people like Bertrand Russell around?

    • Replies: @Iris
    , @Rdm
  502. Ivan says:
    @Tim too

    Very good point about the atomic clocks with your question about the about what would happen at 1000 Earth radii. Would not the the atomic clock slow down to a snail’s pace? Surely not as you indicate since they are dependent on atomic transitions. I have to correct in the light of this, that my point relate to the corrections involved not the absolute value at the level of the orbit of the satellites. The corrections if necessary are explicable in terms of classical physics if it is a gravitational effect.

    The inventor of the first working atomic clock, Louis Essen himself did not think much of Einstein’s relativity theories. So a guy who actually invented, calibrates and measures with the atomic clock while working at UK’s NPL till 1972 when he would have been aware of stuff like laser ranging and the claimed slowing or speeding of clocks didn’t believe that the Einstienian stuff was anything other than a useless and damaging distraction. Read especially the money quote on career damaging prospects in his Wiki entry.

  503. vot tak says:
    @FB

    The role of bombercommand and like trolls is to troll. Debunk their bs they simply repost the same talking points regardless. The critter has zero useful to contribute to an adult discussion. Mark the things as trolls and ignore their provocations as it is obvious to even the most dim what the things are doing, sites allowing their disruption are by default facilitating it and encouraging propaganda spamming over intellegent discussion. Look at most comments here, they are basically repetitions of far right likudite propaganda. And unz encourages it. A decent site would block their spam, an indecenent site encourages their spamming because they agree wth the propaganda lines and want the increased page count traffic these turds generate.

    • Agree: FB
  504. goshawk says:
    @Ultrafart the Brave

    “The Soviet Union abandoned attempts at putting men into space after a Cosmonaut returned from a deep-space excursion in a highly irradiated deep-fried condition. Yet the USA managed to put a whole menagerie of giant-leaping heroes in tin cans onto the Moon with nary a suntan.”

    Soviet Union/Russia has put over 150 individuals into space.

    Around 250 individuals have spent time on the International Space Station. Radiation from the sun and cosmic rays do present a risk. Similarly, working with x-rays, nuclear materials and being a pilot (lots of time at high altitude) present risk from radiation. The risks aren’t catastrophic but may give an increased possibility of developing cancers. NASA sets the “acceptable” risk at a 3% lifetime risk of exposure-induced death (REID). If there was a mission to the Moon (or Mars) then it’s likely a higher risk would be regarded as acceptable. Nobody gets fried.

    • Replies: @Ultrafart the Brave
  505. Ivan says:
    @Tim too

    Thank you. I am not selling that, now that you have caught me inspector. You must have already read my partial retraction above. The reason I am writing this is to take time off from this interminable coil. It has taken me the better part of three days to come up with my paltry efforts. I wish to spend no further time on it. It takes on the nature of an obsession. Not a good place to be.

    • Replies: @Ivan
  506. Iris says:
    @Ivan

    I mean if the 1969 landing was a fake wouldn’t experts from Europe and Japan in addition to the Soviet Union have gone through with a toothcomb the subsequent flights and published it.

    Russia did all but officially endorse that the “Moon Landing” was a hoax.

    State-owned TV channel RT broadcasts in 5 languages, but the content is very different from one branch to another. TV licences are granted by the respective countries each branch is based in, so the English and French versions are the most heavily censored.

    In July 2018, RT Arabic broadcast a five-part documentary, featuring Physics professor Aleksander Popov, and called “Did the Americans really go to the Moon?”

    For 2 hours, Dr Popov presented technical and engineering arguments, and absolutely shred to pieces the official “Moon Landing” narrative. He also candidly and honestly exposed the USSR’s complicity in covering the hoax in exchange for economic and financial advantages from the US.

    Such interview being broadcast on an official TV channel is a straightforward affirmation that Russia knows, and publicly hints that the Apollo missions were a hoax.

    The show is a well-established, very popular feature of RT Arabic called “Rihla Fil Dhakira”.
    https://arabic.rt.com/prg/program/10616-رحلة_في_الذاكرة/

    So far, video of the full broadcast specific to the “Moon Landing Hoax” has been watched by over 4 million viewers on YouTube:

    • Thanks: Robjil
    • Replies: @Ivan
  507. Rdm says:
    @Ivan

    One of the things I remember reading long time ago, forget the source, was that Russian first tried to debunk the moonwalking. A couple of fact checks here though, moon landing was landing any foreign objects and moon walking specifically refers to 3 astronauts: Neil Armstrong, Michael Collins, Buzz Aldrin from Apollo 11, supposedly walking on the Moon in 1969.

    Russians were ahead of the space exploration in any possible ways: Luna rovers, space walking, dog orbiting in the Earth, you name it. They couldn’t simply send Men to the Moon. Initially reaction was to debunk any possible ways and it was (my opinion) believable to debunk every aspect of the Apollo 11. But to ultimately debunk, they need to send Men to the Moon on their own and let their men die on the way and prove that You’d see? It can’t be done. This approach is out of question.

    The second opinion among Russians, which became the staple of the Moonwalking until today, was let Americans fake as much as they want. Once the truth comes out, they (Americans) will eat their own bullets. This way Russians won’t need to fire a single bullet, but the United States will implode with global ostracism.

    • Replies: @Ivan
  508. @FB

    Waverider, launched from California, hit its target, an atoll in the SW Pacific, that is not an experiment. That Mach 6.5 claim you cited is is purposeful understatement of United States capabilities, thats how we represent ourselves, it is the American genius for Public Relations. Certainly it is not deployed, and needs more development, but simply has not been needed. When it is needed, for the Big One in 2035, it will be deployed. I see no tests for Zircon, and I looked, how can Russia deploy it, but I have no doubt it will be ready when Russia needs it, and they desperately need it. The Russians are very very good, but are light years beyond The United States only in your imagination. You talked crap and garbage about the Wright brothers, I don’t take your word for anything. The problem with the Russians is they like to bullshit to look scary, like the film of the Russian tanks racing across a river, what they didn’t show was the concrete apron laid in the riverbed. No one in The United States underestimates the Russians, the MIG-29 was a much feared adversary, within its limitations. The Russians like to show spectacular demonstrations of SU-57 maneuverability with vectored thrust, what they don’t show is that maybe three pilots in the RuAF can do that. The F35 can do the same without vectored thrust, and by any pilot in the USAF rated for the F35. Your problem is you are both an extremist Russian chauvinist and have a terminal case of Anti-Americanism. This leads you to ridiculous belittling of The United States, like your noisome gassing over the Wright brothers. I cannot see how someone who claims to be an aeronutical engineer could make so many errors of fact on the history of aviation. You fucked up royally with the shoot down of the Russian ELINT aircraft, now you are talking Moon Landing Hoax nonsense. You have zero credibility in your alleged specialty. I went to your website, it is total crap. That article you linked about “The United States racing to catch up” is more PR to put a fire under Congress’s rear end. Unlike Russia, The United States has to deal with a wide range of military tasks, so at times, there are areas that receive less attention because another area has priority, the past twenty years has been COIN, that is over. When the time comes The United States will have weapons like Avangard, and the Russians won’t be able to stop them either. The Russians MUST have Avangard because The United States tracks every Russian submarine 24/7, and when push comes to shove we will sink them all. However the Russians know they do not know where American submarines are and do not have the capability to degrade ours if they did. You act like The Faker with his vineyard website, endless sneering, pretending that Americans are stupid and incompetent, and we are neither .

    • Replies: @Ivan
    , @FB
    , @HeebHunter
    , @FB
  509. Ivan says:
    @Iris

    Come on RT is a new broadcast channel they can do whatever they want. If you show me articles from the Sputnik magazine from those days, I’ll definitely read it

  510. Ivan says:
    @Rdm

    I have to disagree .

  511. Ivan says:
    @Bombercommand

    It’s kind of funny that some people are always disparaging the capabilities of the Americans when such things as the GPS and the Internet not to mention the computers and communication equipment behind all this was pioneered and guided to fruition by such American entities as DARPA , NASA and Bell Telephones.

  512. @goshawk

    My verbage

    The Soviet Union abandoned attempts at putting men into space…

    should probably have been more like

    The Soviet Union abandoned attempts at putting men into deep space…

    or even

    The Soviet Union abandoned attempts at putting men on the moon…

    Nevertheless, regarding the off-Earth environs…

    Around 250 individuals have spent time on the International Space Station.

    ISS (Low Earth orbit) = beneath the Van Allen Belt & within the Magnetosphere = safe.
    Van Allen Belt = intense radiation = very nasty.
    Deep Space = beyond the Magnetosphere = unshielded Solar & Cosmic radiation = still nasty.

    How nasty is the unshielded Solar & Cosmic radiation? I haven’t been there, so can’t provide any personal anecdotes, but here’s a couple of links on the subject:

    https://science.nasa.gov/science-news/news-articles/earths-magnetosphere
    https://sciencing.com/earths-magnetosphere-protects-suns-solar-wind-1955.html

    As for the fried Cosmonaut, I wasn’t there at the time – but it’s what I heard.

  513. One of the greatest historical fraud is that Americans walked on the moon. Period.

    • Agree: Iris
  514. @chuckywiz

    E=mC2, where is the relativity in this equation?

    The supreme irony, IMO, is that this equation becomes self-evident when considered in the context of matter manifesting as motion in the Aether – the very concept that Einstein strove to dismiss.

  515. @Iris

    “A flag is an unprotected piece of material that could never resist years of Moon’s “weather” erosion: winds, solar radiation, etc.. Not finding the flag is not a proof that it was never there in the first place.”

    Winds on the moon? Oh, Iris!

    Why to look for flags? There should be much bigger wastes, like three rovers (when only one was used in a studio or in some desert) and six landing modules… Not on the Chinese photos!? How dare they?

  516. PhilO says:

    This article has been blocked by Facebook, obviously because it doesn’t fit the narrative of God’s Chosen Psychopaths.

    • Replies: @InnerCynic
  517. @Iris

    “What was used as a “proof” was retroreflectors, but they can be put by unmanned missions.”

    You don’t even need a retroflector to have a retroflexion from the surface of the moon. There should be something about it on aulis.com.

    • Replies: @Iris
  518. FB says: • Website
    @Bombercommand

    Look you complete idiot…

    Look up the Boeing X51 Waverider Program…these facts are no secret…

    A total of four flight tests were done in Southern California from 2010 to 2013, with flight over the Pacific near Naval Air Station Point Mugu…the experimental craft were carried aboard a B52 bomber and two out of the four test flights failed after only a few seconds…

    The fourth and final flight was the only one that succeeded, and it only lasted for 210 seconds, which is not bad really…

    On 1 May 2013, the X-51 performed its first fully successful flight test on its fourth test flight. The X-51 and booster detached from a B-52H and was powered to Mach 4.8 (3,200 mph; 5,100 km/h) by the booster rocket.

    It then separated cleanly from the booster and ignited its own engine. The test aircraft then accelerated to Mach 5.1 (3,400 mph; 5,400 km/h) and flew for 210 seconds until running out of fuel and plunging into the Pacific Ocean off Point Mugu for over six minutes of total flight time…

    There was never any launch from California and flight to some atoll in the South Pacific like you claim…that is pure fiction that never happened…

    Look, I have provided complete links to authoritative sources like Nasa about everything that I write about here…yet you somehow claim my sources are not valid…?

    You’re basically an ignorant nut…you know absolutely zilch about even flying a small airplane, never mind the science of aerodynamics…yet you want to argue with people who are professionals in the field…how stupid and ridiculous can you possibly be…?

    I asked you already to stop spamming here with out-and-out retarded information that has absolutely NOTHING to do with reality…but you keep persisting in wasting my time and that of everyone here…

    A complete jackass that thinks he is entitled to be a windbag here on this website…like the other retarded goof ‘ivan’…

    As for your claims that the US somehow doesn’t feel the need to deploy scramjet technology, because ‘it’s not needed’…that is like saying nobody was interested in developing the jet engine because ‘it wasn’t needed’…

    The jet engine is the one thing that made global air travel possible…the scramjet engine will make global travel five times as fast…right now there are long range flights that last 20 hours with today’s airliners that fly at about Mach 0.85…when scramjet technology is perfected we will be flying at Mach 5 and those superlong flights will last maybe four or five hours, a huge leap forward for mankind…

    It’s nobody’s fault here that you are butt-hurting big time due to the facts of the current aerospace technology, where the Russians have a huge lead…that does not give you the right to make up ‘alternative’ facts and basically keep plastering this discussion with flatout bullshit…

  519. @Ivan

    Yep, it is called cognitive dissonance.

    “It is easier to fool people than to convince them that they were fooled.” Mark Twain.

    It proves how gullible a 9 yo boy can be.

    On tv, I saw a man living and returning from Mars. But maybe are you not aware of the fact?

  520. Ivan says:
    @S

    Thanks for this and the previous post. The suffering of those caught in Satanic Mills, back breaking slavery in commercial plantations and the harrowing transports were indeed immense. What is called primitive accumulation