NESARA comes to Ed Brown land

Post by **Joey Smith** » Fri Aug 03, 2007 10:47 am

http://questforfairtrialinconcordnh.blogspot.com/

ASITStands · Post by **ASITStands** » Fri Aug 03, 2007 2:07 pm

Saw that. It's gone now, so someone convinced the web administrator [Fred Smart? or Doug Kenline?] it was a hoax.

By the way, where's Doug? Haven't seen a thing from him or Gene in a long while.

Weathervane · Post by **Weathervane** » Fri Aug 03, 2007 2:19 pm

Gene and Robert Clarkson got married about a month ago.

I'm not sure about Dougie.

Post by **webhick** » Fri Aug 03, 2007 2:25 pm

tommygun wrote:Gene and Robert Clarkson got married about a month ago.

To each other?

Weathervane · Post by **Weathervane** » Fri Aug 03, 2007 3:24 pm

webhick wrote:
tommygun wrote:Gene and Robert Clarkson got married about a month ago.
To each other?

Yeah, where's that picture someone posted a few weeks ago?

Dezcad · Post by **Dezcad** » Fri Aug 03, 2007 4:49 pm

tommygun wrote:
webhick wrote:
tommygun wrote:Gene and Robert Clarkson got married about a month ago.
To each other?
Yeah, where's that picture someone posted a few weeks ago?

This one:

ASITStands · Post by **ASITStands** » Fri Aug 03, 2007 9:52 pm

It's turned weird again.

They have now posted a story by Sorcha Faal saying a massive ULF 'blast' brought the bridge down. It's talking about an Ultra-Low-Frequency acoustic wave, and the article seems to point to Augsburg College located less than a mile from the bridge.

Post by **grixit** » Fri Aug 03, 2007 10:33 pm

Wow, even Martin Luther is part of the conspiracy!

In any case, the abbreviation ULF is used for radio. Low frequency audio is called infrasound.

ASITStands · Post by **ASITStands** » Fri Aug 03, 2007 10:39 pm

Didn't know that. Just scanned the article, but isn't it amazing how conspirators can't even get their facts straight? Between those kind of errors and poor grammar/spelling, it's totally mind-boggling what the imagination dreams up.

Post by **Joey Smith** » Fri Aug 03, 2007 11:36 pm

Some nut claiming "inside job" is just hours away if it hasn't happened already. "You just can't bring down a bridge that big unless explosive were strapped to the pilings!"

The TPs will fall for these theories in droves, and assert them as additional "evidence" why they should not have to pay taxes.

Post by **webhick** » Sat Aug 04, 2007 12:04 am

CaptainKickback wrote:Remember kids, when stuff like this occurs there is never just one thing that caused the disaster. It is a series of events (with each event by and of itself being survivable) that all occur in order for the disaster to occur.

A good conspiracy consists of a series of seemingly innocuous events that culminate in a grander event/purpose.

Official Notice: Neither the Illuminati nor their affiliates had anything to do with the bridge collapsing. That's also the rumor around the water cooler. Sometimes shit happens. It's terrible and it sucks, but it happens.

gezco · Post by **gezco** » Sat Aug 04, 2007 1:08 am

webhick wrote:
CaptainKickback wrote:Remember kids, when stuff like this occurs there is never just one thing that caused the disaster. It is a series of events (with each event by and of itself being survivable) that all occur in order for the disaster to occur.
A good conspiracy consists of a series of seemingly innocuous events that culminate in a grander event/purpose.

Official Notice: Neither the Illuminati nor their affiliates had anything to do with the bridge collapsing. That's also the rumor around the water cooler. Sometimes sh*t happens. It's terrible and it sucks, but it happens.

I'm really surprised that there isn't a conspiracy theory web cite up yet. I mean it's been what, 29 hours?

Post by **Judge Roy Bean** » Sat Aug 04, 2007 11:47 am

I've been wondering why they haven't mentioned Haliburton yet.

ElfNinosMom · Post by **ElfNinosMom** » Sat Aug 04, 2007 5:19 pm

They're all just a bunch of crazies. Everybody knows that bridges collapse only after a visit from The Mothman.

buck09 · Post by **buck09** » Sat Aug 04, 2007 8:34 pm

grixit wrote:Wow, even Martin Luther is part of the conspiracy!

In any case, the abbreviation ULF is used for radio. Low frequency audio is called infrasound.

You can't even get someone to sh*t their pants with ULF, much less take a bridge down...

Cobalt Shiva · Post by **Cobalt Shiva** » Mon Aug 06, 2007 2:09 pm

ASITStands wrote:It's turned weird again.

They have now posted a story by Sorcha Faal saying a massive ULF 'blast' brought the bridge down. It's talking about an Ultra-Low-Frequency acoustic wave, and the article seems to point to Augsburg College located less than a mile from the bridge.

Any infrasound wave with enough energy to do that at approximately one mile would involve generating enough energy to vaporize a good chunk of Augsburg College.

Burzmali · Post by **Burzmali** » Mon Aug 06, 2007 2:28 pm

Maybe, but I once saw an interesting device demonstrated at the Boston Museum of Science. The "speaker" the presenter had invented could "throw" sound over a reasonable distance (up to 20 feet or so) that could only be heard in about a cubic yard of space. I haven't heard anything about it lately, but his original intent was to use the speakers to allow a couple to watch TV together without watching the same program (TV image splitter extra). Assuming the technology is scalable, and can be adapted to infrasound (the device was ultrasonic to begin with), and someone decided to weaponize it, and they thought a commuter bridge would be a good test target, I could see this happening. However, I try to limit myself to only 3 impossibles before lunch.

Cobalt Shiva · Post by **Cobalt Shiva** » Mon Aug 06, 2007 3:13 pm

Burzmali wrote:Maybe, but I once saw an interesting device demonstrated at the Boston Museum of Science. The "speaker" the presenter had invented could "throw" sound over a reasonable distance (up to 20 feet or so) that could only be heard in about a cubic yard of space. I haven't heard anything about it lately, but his original intent was to use the speakers to allow a couple to watch TV together without watching the same program (TV image splitter extra). Assuming the technology is scalable, and can be adapted to infrasound (the device was ultrasonic to begin with), and someone decided to weaponize it, and they thought a commuter bridge would be a good test target, I could see this happening. However, I try to limit myself to only 3 impossibles before lunch.

The problem with this idea is that the emitter for an infrasound signal would be roughly the size of a very large skyscraper, and you'd still have an enormous amount of energy being pumped into the device, up in the range usually associated with a low-yield nuclear weapon. The neighbors would notice.

Burzmali · Post by **Burzmali** » Mon Aug 06, 2007 3:20 pm

Cobalt Shiva wrote:
Burzmali wrote:Maybe, but I once saw an interesting device demonstrated at the Boston Museum of Science. The "speaker" the presenter had invented could "throw" sound over a reasonable distance (up to 20 feet or so) that could only be heard in about a cubic yard of space. I haven't heard anything about it lately, but his original intent was to use the speakers to allow a couple to watch TV together without watching the same program (TV image splitter extra). Assuming the technology is scalable, and can be adapted to infrasound (the device was ultrasonic to begin with), and someone decided to weaponize it, and they thought a commuter bridge would be a good test target, I could see this happening. However, I try to limit myself to only 3 impossibles before lunch.
The problem with this idea is that the emitter for an infrasound signal would be roughly the size of a very large skyscraper, and you'd still have an enormous amount of energy being pumped into the device, up in the range usually associated with a low-yield nuclear weapon. The neighbors would notice.

That's the trick, the device this guy had emitted in the ultrasonic range, but at a specific distance the waves resonated with the air (I think) causing a localized audible sound wave. Functionally, it behaved like a sound "laser", only the person he pointed at could hear it.

see:
http://www.gopaultech.com/2006/08/hyper ... l-speaker/

Cobalt Shiva · Post by **Cobalt Shiva** » Mon Aug 06, 2007 3:28 pm

That's the trick, the device this guy had emitted in ultrasonic range, but at a specific distance the waves resonated with the air (I think) causing a localized audible sound wave. Functionally, it behaved like a sound "laser", only the person he pointed at could her it.

What I think you're describing is two ultrasonic emitters that generate destructive and constructive interference in the audible range at a certain point, which can be modulated to produce recognizable sounds.

Very cool.

However, emitter size and spacing would be inversely proportionate to the wavelength being emitted and the wavelength and intensity desired at the target.

Now, to do that with infrasound would require two emitter structures at least as big the bridge in question, properly positioned (i.e., about a bridge length apart), each with their own energy source.

Like I said . . . the neighbors would notice.