PDA

View Full Version : The Steven Hawkings Conpiracy


CurtisJohns
03-26-2009, 05:44 PM
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/eb/Stephen_Hawking.StarChild.jpg/200px-Stephen_Hawking.StarChild.jpg

Some people believe this man to know a lot more then he lets on. Possibly the worlds most intelligent scientist, but why does he choose to withdraw contribution when discussion possibilty of Extra terrestrial life or another planet. Steven Hawkings, "A legend" In the name of young scientists surely most know something we dont, possibly he may have helped the government.

What do you think? Post your concerns or arguments below...

BlueAngel
03-26-2009, 10:14 PM
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/eb/Stephen_Hawking.StarChild.jpg/200px-Stephen_Hawking.StarChild.jpg

Some people believe this man to know a lot more then he lets on. Possibly the worlds most intelligent scientist, but why does he choose to withdraw contribution when discussion possibilty of Extra terrestrial life or another planet. Steven Hawkings, "A legend" In the name of young scientists surely most know something we dont, possibly he may have helped the government.

What do you think? Post your concerns or arguments below...

Just because Hawkings might be the world's most intelligent scientist doesn't infer that he has any more knowledge about ET's than the rest of us do.

Maybe he withdraws from speaking about ET's or life on other planets because he doesn't have any conclusive evidence that they exist.

Central_Scrutinizer
03-30-2009, 02:14 AM
Hats off to the ONLY honest person in the science community, to admit he was wrong. Imagine if Einstein had been properly exposed as the plagiarist that he was, we may have listened more closely to a man barely anyone knows about; Nikola Tesla.

If Hawking can admit he was wrong once, he could admit he's wrong about other "theories". But, when the money's rollin' in by the truckloads... you usually don't open your mouth too wide. Right Stevie? lol

Einstein was a total phony. They even stripped his Nobel Prize that he never deserved, away.

Nikola Tesla, on the other hand, was TRULY a Genius, and I hate using that word too openly, as it's FAR overrated.

iHIMself™
06-01-2009, 07:37 AM
Ok. Let me just get this straight. A man who is utterly physically incapacitated, even unable to suck in his own drool, has some sort of cord plugged in his head, that picks up his thoughts, sorry, I mean words AFTER his thoughts (I think before I speak), which is then transformed into a sound, which is then recognized, transformed again, and regurgitated in a synthesized voice, is the world's greatest scientist. Cough. Ahem.

I remember watching a documentary that showed a blind man with a plug in his head hooked up to computer, which allowed him to see very simple graphics. Dots. Looking at their hairstyles, I'd say it was from the 70's. But the computer showed HIM the graphics. So, a camera, and a better computer, and you have all-seeing eyes for the blind. 70's.

Though, what YOU are saying is a computer recognising and interpreting HIS THOUGHTS, and then reproduces the thoughts HE CHOOSES to publish. I'm sorry, but if that really exists, then let me praise THAT scientist. But I don't think so. Honestly. Are we all that gullible?

iHIMself™
06-01-2009, 07:44 AM
If they're so damn smart, why don't they hook up that wheelchair to his head so he can think it move? Yeah, I bet they can't. They can hook up an arm and have it move by thought, but not very intelligently. Simple movement. But to retrieve thoughts and then filter the words into an intelligent sentence? Give me a fucking break.

waikare
06-26-2009, 08:16 PM
yea i agee how can it really read his thoughts, more like the goverment told him what to say lol

BlueAngel
06-26-2009, 10:30 PM
Ok. Let me just get this straight. A man who is utterly physically incapacitated, even unable to suck in his own drool, has some sort of cord plugged in his head, that picks up his thoughts, sorry, I mean words AFTER his thoughts (I think before I speak), which is then transformed into a sound, which is then recognized, transformed again, and regurgitated in a synthesized voice, is the world's greatest scientist. Cough. Ahem.

I remember watching a documentary that showed a blind man with a plug in his head hooked up to computer, which allowed him to see very simple graphics. Dots. Looking at their hairstyles, I'd say it was from the 70's. But the computer showed HIM the graphics. So, a camera, and a better computer, and you have all-seeing eyes for the blind. 70's.

Though, what YOU are saying is a computer recognising and interpreting HIS THOUGHTS, and then reproduces the thoughts HE CHOOSES to publish. I'm sorry, but if that really exists, then let me praise THAT scientist. But I don't think so. Honestly. Are we all that gullible?

Please enlighten the forum as to Steven Hawkings' background.

I find your post quite intriguing.

Seriously, I need to research this guy.

Yes.

I am familiar with him, but your post has provoked me into wanting to know more about how he operates and if we truly are that gullible or not.

BlueAngel
06-26-2009, 10:44 PM
Why isn't this gadget used on persons who are hospitalized and comatose?

That would be great.

I mean, think about it.

Their thoughts could be transformed into words and forced out of them.

Or, does it only work for Hawkings?

Who invented this technology?

rickwd7
07-09-2009, 09:52 PM
Ok. Let me just get this straight. A man who is utterly physically incapacitated, even unable to suck in his own drool, has some sort of cord plugged in his head, that picks up his thoughts, sorry, I mean words AFTER his thoughts (I think before I speak), which is then transformed into a sound, which is then recognized, transformed again, and regurgitated in a synthesized voice, is the world's greatest scientist. Cough. Ahem.

I remember watching a documentary that showed a blind man with a plug in his head hooked up to computer, which allowed him to see very simple graphics. Dots. Looking at their hairstyles, I'd say it was from the 70's. But the computer showed HIM the graphics. So, a camera, and a better computer, and you have all-seeing eyes for the blind. 70's.

Though, what YOU are saying is a computer recognising and interpreting HIS THOUGHTS, and then reproduces the thoughts HE CHOOSES to publish. I'm sorry, but if that really exists, then let me praise THAT scientist. But I don't think so. Honestly. Are we all that gullible?

Ha ha. I think this wraps it ALL up nicely about the "great" stephen hawking. this guy has been used as a scientific sideshow for years.

next.

Laokin
10-05-2009, 10:45 PM
If they're so damn smart, why don't they hook up that wheelchair to his head so he can think it move? Yeah, I bet they can't. They can hook up an arm and have it move by thought, but not very intelligently. Simple movement. But to retrieve thoughts and then filter the words into an intelligent sentence? Give me a fucking break.


They could, hook up his wheelchair and let his mind control it. It's not actually interpreting the "words" he thinks, but it measures the electrical activity in the brain. The harder you concentrate the more electrical activity in the brain, this can then be bound to software in order to control movement position.

It already exists and you can buy it for about $300. You can use it to control video games now... If I can move my Unreal Tournament avatar forward, backward, up, down, and rotate with my mind.... than it's just a simple as programming software to apply throttle to 2 different motors in his chair.

One motor for each wheel. If you wish to turn, you turn each wheel opposite to the other. To go forward, they both go forward and backwards the same.

YouTube - Neurosky

There are currently two in production that I know of.

One is called "Neurosky", the other is called "Emotiv."

Technology is getting much better..... don't be so closed minded.

P.S.
They were both at GDC '09 on display for random people to try. They DO work.... and I DID try it.


*edit*

There are two more too, "BrainGate" and "CyberLink."

You can find videos of them all with a simple google.

albie
10-06-2009, 05:19 AM
Hats off to the ONLY honest person in the science community, to admit he was wrong. Imagine if Einstein had been properly exposed as the plagiarist that he was, we may have listened more closely to a man barely anyone knows about; Nikola Tesla.

Einstein was a total phony. They even stripped his Nobel Prize that he never deserved, away.



I've seen no evidence that he was a phony. I've seen a lot ot racialist specualtion that is weak as a swimmer's piss.

Laokin
10-06-2009, 11:16 PM
I've seen no evidence that he was a phony. I've seen a lot ot racialist specualtion that is weak as a swimmer's piss.


I never heard of him being a fraud, but I do know that Nikola Tesla was a brilliant man. He deserved more attention. Fucking Thomas Edison, fucking hack, not only stole the mans Idea, but then slandered the hell out of him until everybody thought he was just an entertainer.

We could be so much further in electronic technology had the credit for the light bulb gone to Tesla. He had ways of wirelessly transferring power. Something we are just figuring our how to do today. Not only are we just figuring out how to do it, he KNEW how to do it.... at long range with high enough wattage to power cities.

All with no wires.

(See cordless, plugless, cell phone chargers... or Microsoft Surface.)

Out of the Box
11-06-2009, 05:00 AM
Hats off to the ONLY honest person in the science community, to admit he was wrong.

I guess that's the difference between a real genius and a scientist posing as one ;)

Einstein was a total phony. They even stripped his Nobel Prize that he never deserved, away.

Nikola Tesla, on the other hand, was TRULY a Genius, and I hate using that word too openly, as it's FAR overrated.

Tesla was a loner, not a Jew and a continuation of his latest research could lead to free energy. These are three reasons why Tesla is so obscure unlike his well-networked competitor Edison or the Jewish fraud Einstein....

Out of the Box
11-06-2009, 05:01 AM
I've seen no evidence that he was a phony. I've seen a lot ot racialist specualtion that is weak as a swimmer's piss.

I've seen no evidence that Einstein was a genius. I've seen a lot of Jewish-supremacist speculation that is weak as a swimmer's piss.