Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

UFO Physics Conspiracy (2) : Northern Lights

Expand Messages
  • Roger Anderton
    UFO Physics Conspiracy (2): Northern Lights The same type of conspiracy that Fleischman- Pons cold fusion experiences was felt by a forgotten great scientist
    Message 1 of 1 , Sep 5, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      UFO Physics Conspiracy (2): Northern Lights

      The same type of conspiracy that Fleischman- Pons cold fusion experiences was felt by a forgotten great scientist Professor Kristian Birkeland, who died in 1918 and discovered the cause of the Northern Lights (Aurora Borealis):

      "For fifty years after his death his [Birkeland's] scientific reputation sank inexorably into oblivion... One man in particular, Sydney Chapman, continued the tradition of opposition by British scientists to Birkeland's work. Chapman [#1] had seen Birkeland checking some magnetic records in Greenwich en-route to Egypt, but they had not spoken. He was a young, ambitious mathematician who became the leading scientist in the field of geomagnetism after the First World War, holding a dominant position in British science until his death in 1970. Chapman's career was the mirror opposite to Birkeland's. He was elected to the Fellowship of the Royal Society in 1919 at the early age of thirty-one, was invited to serve as president of five important scientific societies and was awarded numerous prizes for his work."

      "Chapman considered Birkeland's intrepid expeditions into the Arctic unnecessary and anachronistic and the Norwegian professor [Birkeland]'s theories too 'curious' for consideration. His antipathy was caused primarily by his disbelief in Birkeland's main hypothesis - that cathode rays from the sun were guided into the Earth's atmosphere along magnetic field lines, causing the Northern Lights and magnetic perturbations...."

      "Apart from being somewhat hypocritical, Chapman's criticisms revealed an ignorance of Birkeland's work. [#2] In 1916 Birkeland had published a paper outlining his theory concerning the rays emitted by the sun, in which he stated: 'From a physical point of view it is most probable that these new rays are neither exclusively negative nor positive rays, but of both kinds.' Chapman later advocated this correct theory, without reference to Birkeland. [#3]"

      "He appeared to have a general disregard for Scandinavian science, making condescending comments about Birkeland's colleague Stormer, and the Nobel Laureate Hannes Alfven... Over five decades he effectively eradicated the memory of Birkeland's work and entirely dismissed his contribution to science, as seen by his opening address to the Birkeland Symposium in Sandefjord, Norway, in 1967: "Though Birkeland was certainly intensely interested in the aurora, it must be confessed that his direct observational contributions to auroral knowledge was slight...."" [#4]

      "One young American scientist at the symposium, Alex Dessler, questioned Chapman about Birkeland. 'I asked him whether Birkeland's work had any influence on him at all. He glared at me and said, "How could it? It was all wrong.""

      "In the last three years of Chapman's life, however, space satellites found incontrovertible evidence supporting Birkeland's ideas of a flow of electric particles from the sun. In 1962 instruments on board NASA's Mariner II spacecraft on its way to Venus recorded the presence of an electrified gas travelling through space ...."

      "Birkeland's understanding that the same charged particles that caused magnetic storms also caused auroras is fully accepted today although a more sophisticated model of how the particles reach the poles is now available." [#5]

      My comments:

      #1 a typical scenario follows where scientist A is researching a new subject, and scientist B with a big reputation resting on what is already established, sets up a persecution campaign against scientist A, and encourages the rest of the science community to engage in that activity.

      #2 scientist B who persecutes scientist A does not even properly understand what scientist A is saying.

      #3 Next scientist B thinks a little and accepts the theory that scientist A is advocating, but does not give credit to scientist A!!! And carries on his persecution campaign against scientist A. CRAZY??- you tell me.

      #4 Scientist B is completely dismissive of scientist A's work, and thanks to the influence of scientist B on the science community, scientist A falls into obscurity to be forgotten.

      #5 Finally the theory of scientist A becomes more established, but scientist A remains mostly forgotten.

      This sort of scenario repeats itself again and again in the History of Science. For A = Birkeland and B = Chapman, we can now read in the modern scenario A = Fleischman- Pons -and co., and B = Park- Zimmerman, see article (1) on cold fusion.

      * Actually there was more to Birkeland whose wider theory connects more to the UFO topic, and that is forgotten: In Birkeland's cosmogonic theory, he claimed that electromagnetic forces played a role as important as gravity. i.e. Links to Electrogravitics a.k.a (also known as) Antigravity which the Establishment have managed to dismiss thanks to the efforts of Chapman and his like-minded brethren: Park- Zimmerman. The UFO Physics Conspiracy continues, with scientist B types now having greater influence to persecute scientist A types.

      * History is a process where the same type of players repeat the same sort of activities again and again. --- scientist B persecutes scientist A in order to maintain the UFO Conspiracy.

      More than 200 years ago a Jesuit priest discovered the Unified Field Theory (that Einstein was looking for); the Science Community had to go into frantic activity to cover that up. Dread the thought, if people understood the physics that the universe worked by, then they could work out what UFOs were, couldn't allow that, deems scientist B types.


      Reference for Birkeland: The Northern Lights, Lucy Jago, Hamish Hamilton, London 2001

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.