Life based on carbon needs very especial conditions to thrive, life on earth is a clear example of that. Lots of time and research have been dedicated trying to find carbon based life elsewhere on the Universe, but that search may be too narrow because that search assumes that life can only be based on carbon.
The genesis of Life somehow appears to contradicts the second law of thermodynamics( locally, it is known that the law holds in the system under consideration), this law in essence state that: the degree of disorder or randomness(entropy) in our Universe always is increasing, but Life is characterized by an increase in order( a decrease in entropy ). It appears that when “complex" systems are considered then some “emergent" properties are present that can not be explained by consideration of basic principles. The emergency/genesis of carbon based Life is such an emergent property.
It will be very naïve to think that these emerging properties are the absolute domain of chemical reactions( carbon based/organic chemical reactions ), complex plasmas also are subject to the same emergent properties of self-organization, as it is explained in the 2008 book: Elementary Physics of Complex plasmas: http://en.bookfi.org/book/455683, so Life based on plasma could be a real possibility.
If plasma based life is a reality, then that kind of life may have been present in our Universe since very early after the Big Ban and if plasma based life follows more or less the same principles that carbon based life, then plasma based life forms had plenty of time to expand all over the Universe. Plasma based life forms can exist in “empty" space, there is nothing practically that can slow down their expansion in any direction.
Carbon based life forms could have not emerged very early in our Universe because the basic elements for carbon based life forms are created inside stars, so that implies that several billions years have to pass before these elements are abundant enough for carbon based life forms to be a reality. It could be argued( The Anthropic Principle ) that for us to be here the Universe needs to be as old as it is now, but that argument do not applies to plasma based life forms. So if that is the case plasma based life forms could be pervasive all over the Universe. We could be missing something that may be in our own backyard and we are not seeing it because we are not looking for that.
Show me the evidence.
It’s important to note that the 2nd law of thermodynamics that you are quoting is missing a key piece: it refers only to a CLOSED system. The Earth is far from a closed system with the Sun pouring energy into it as well as the contribution from the heat of the Earth’s core.
As far as your idea for plasma based life, what preliminary evidence do you have that supports this? It seems to me that this is an idea of a way to have life exist from the start the universe rather than a property plasma that you feel could be similar to carbon based life.
What kind of plasma are you talking about? We can create all kinds of plasmas in labs and industrially. Argon under low pressure with a high RF energy applied is great at etching material in a slow, controlled way and neon in a tube makes a pretty red plasma for signs. The plasma right after the big bang was nothing like either of these as it was made up of fundamental particles rather than atoms.
complex plasmas also are subject to the same emergent properties of self-organization. ...Sorry haven't read the book. (so many books so little time) But, what emergent properties? Being subject to gravity?
Good points, Scott. We appear to have a drive-by crackpot poster here. He posted the same drivel at physforum.com] a few hours after as he posted here.
Life based on carbon needs very especial conditions to thrive, life on earth is a clear example of that. Lots of time and research have been dedicated trying to find carbon based life elsewhere on the Universe, but that search may be too narrow because that search assumes that life can only be based on carbon. The genesis of Life somehow appears to contradicts the second law of thermodynamics( locally, it is known that the law holds in the system under consideration), this law in essence state that: the degree of disorder or randomness(entropy) in our Universe always is increasing, but Life is characterized by an increase in order( a decrease in entropy ). It appears that when “complex" systems are considered then some “emergent" properties are present that can not be explained by consideration of basic principles. The emergency/genesis of carbon based Life is such an emergent property. It will be very naïve to think that these emerging properties are the absolute domain of chemical reactions( carbon based/organic chemical reactions ), complex plasmas also are subject to the same emergent properties of self-organization, as it is explained in the 2008 book: Elementary Physics of Complex plasmas: http://en.bookfi.org/book/455683, so Life based on plasma could be a real possibility. If plasma based life is a reality, then that kind of life may have been present in our Universe since very early after the Big Ban and if plasma based life follows more or less the same principles that carbon based life, then plasma based life forms had plenty of time to expand all over the Universe. Plasma based life forms can exist in “empty" space, there is nothing practically that can slow down their expansion in any direction. Carbon based life forms could have not emerged very early in our Universe because the basic elements for carbon based life forms are created inside stars, so that implies that several billions years have to pass before these elements are abundant enough for carbon based life forms to be a reality. It could be argued( The Anthropic Principle ) that for us to be here the Universe needs to be as old as it is now, but that argument do not applies to plasma based life forms. So if that is the case plasma based life forms could be pervasive all over the Universe. We could be missing something that may be in our own backyard and we are not seeing it because we are not looking for that.So that means goddidit? Lois
complex plasmas also are subject to the same emergent properties of self-organization. ...Sorry haven't read the book. (so many books so little time) But, what emergent properties? Being subject to gravity? In the 2008 book: "Elementary Physics of Complex Plasmas", by authors V. N. Tsytovich et al.(http://en.bookfi.org/book/455683) It is mentioned the "self-organization tendency of complex plasma" and the following striking fact: "that the description of electrostatics of DNA is surprisingly similar to that used in complex plasmas". From that it is really not far fetched to infer the real possibility of the emergency/genesis of Life based on plasma. Now how to look for plasma-like life forms? We should be looking for autonomous plasma-like/amorphous objects in empty space, objects that very likely are similar to unicellular microorganisms showing the same amoebic pulsations and/or configurations, but of course nature forms always will be richer than anybody imagination. These objects of course will be very hard to spot at long distance but not at relatively close range, also very likely some of these objects will be self-luminous and will respond to electromagnetic pulses, maybe they will be found in the high levels of our atmosphere were the atmosphere is very rare, if they already had been spotted and not recognized by what they are it is likely that they were called "anomalies".
Now that you have come back I’ll address your points just for grins.
Life based on carbon needs very especial conditions to thrive...No, it does not. Carbon-based life exists under many conditions here on good old Earth, from terrestrial forms to extremophiles thriving in the deep ocean near volcanic vents.
The genesis of Life somehow appears to contradicts the second law of thermodynamicsThat is a Creationist lie, as pointed out on the physics forum I linked above. The Second Law of Thermodynamics applies to closed stems. Life arose in our solar system. Actually, as far as we know, life has arisen only on Earth, and anyone who has ever walked outside during daylight hours knows the Earth is not a closed system. The reason is blindingly obvious. The universe is a closed system. Solar systems, and even galaxies, are not.
If plasma based life is a reality...Yeah, if. If my feet would feet a railroad track I'd a probably been a train.
Carbon based life forms could have not emerged very early in our Universe because the basic elements for carbon based life forms are created inside stars, so that implies that several billions years have to pass before these elements are abundant enough for carbon based life forms to be a reality. It could be argued( The Anthropic Principle ) that for us to be here the Universe needs to be as old as it is now, but that argument do not applies to plasma based life formsYou were doing we'll until that last phrase.
So if that is the case plasma based life forms could be pervasive all over the Universe. We could be missing something that may be in our own backyard and we are not seeing it because we are not looking for that.With all the instruments we have trained toward the sky you'd think we would pick up some sign of an ancient life form pervasive throughout the universe, yet we have not done so. You have run with a fantasy and tried to turn it into reality with absolutely no evidence. Your argument is, at best, idle speculation. As Christopher Hitchens said, "That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence." Show me the evidence and I'll discuss this further.
complex plasmas also are subject to the same emergent properties of self-organization. ...Sorry haven't read the book. (so many books so little time) But, what emergent properties? Being subject to gravity? In the 2008 book: "Elementary Physics of Complex Plasmas", by authors V. N. Tsytovich et al.(http://en.bookfi.org/book/455683) It is mentioned the "self-organization tendency of complex plasma" and the following striking fact: "that the description of electrostatics of DNA is surprisingly similar to that used in complex plasmas". From that it is really not far fetched to infer the real possibility of the emergency/genesis of Life based on plasma. Now how to look for plasma-like life forms? We should be looking for autonomous plasma-like/amorphous objects in empty space, objects that very likely are similar to unicellular microorganisms showing the same amoebic pulsations and/or configurations, but of course nature forms always will be richer than anybody imagination. These objects of course will be very hard to spot at long distance but not at relatively close range, also very likely some of these objects will be self-luminous and will respond to electromagnetic pulses, maybe they will be found in the high levels of our atmosphere were the atmosphere is very rare, if they already had been spotted and not recognized by what they are it is likely that they were called "anomalies".It's an interesting idea, but plasma isn't a kind of matter like carbon, it's a STATE of matter. Pump enough energy into an atom and electrons strip away to the bare nucleus. How could bare nuclei form complex structures? Sure you could imagine streams of plasma "self-organized" by magnetic fields, but wouldn't that be pretty much be random? How could it give rise to anything that would grow, reproduce, sense its environment, or do any of the things we associate with life (much less intelligence)? I repeat, it's an interesting idea, but it doesn't exactly sound plausible.
Now that you have come back I'll address your points just for grins.There is no creationism here, far from it. I posted earlier: "Now how to look for plasma-like life forms? We should be looking for autonomous plasma-like/amorphous objects in empty space, objects that very likely are similar to unicellular microorganisms showing the same amoebic pulsations and/or configurations, but of course nature forms always will be richer than anybody imagination. These objects of course will be very hard to spot at long distance but not at relatively close range, also very likely some of these objects will be self-luminous and will respond to electromagnetic pulses, maybe they will be found in the high levels of our atmosphere were the atmosphere is very rare, if they already had been spotted and not recognized by what they are it is likely that they were called “anomalies". " And actually that is a description given in hindsight, but I can tell you that you can observe these objects too, these objects are being observed almost in a daily basis all over our planet, usually they are at very high altitude, but they can be observed by anyone using the right tools. Following is a description of the tools needed for that. This is for people that really want to know by themselves without any need of parental/authority figure confirmation or validation: It is well known that the sky scattering of light depends on the light wavelength, it is bigger in the blue portion of the spectrum( the reason why the sky is blue ) and lower in the red portion of the spectrum, it is even lower in the infrared segment and even lower in the short radio wave segment of the spectrum. Now the sky scattering of light( in daylight ) also have a masking effect. The obvious one is the masking of stars in daylight, but of course the stars are always there. But also this masking effect is on all objects that are located in our atmosphere. If we want to make systematic optical observations of the atmosphere we need to take in count this masking effect because many small objects in the atmosphere are rendered "invisible" by this masking effect. That is really very easy to test using binoculars: by observing the sky with binoculars and then observing the sky suing the same binoculars but now with red filters in front of them, many more details will be spotted with the red filters. The effect is even more dramatic if we use infrared capable cameras, or even if we use short radio waves as in a radar. Many more objects will be observed in infrared and even more in short radio waves simply because the sky scattering of electromagnetic radiation is lower in the infrared and even lower in the short radio wave segment of the spectrum. Now armed with this knowledge we can design very effective instruments to do systematic optical observations of the atmosphere, we have really two options: 1- Using a radar to scan the sky and since we want to optically observe the atmosphere we need to place a medium sized telescope aligned and centered with the radar, in that way any object centered in the radar filed of view(FOV) will be optically visible in the telescope FOV. 2- Using an infrared capable camera with zoom lens and an infrared pass filter, lets say a 950nm IR pass filter, as the scanning/spotting portion and then a medium sized telescope aligned and centered with the spotting/searching portion, in that way any object centered in the spotter FOV will be optically visible in the telescope FOV. Since radars are not easy to get option 1 is only available to well funded research groups but option 2, that is very effective, is really available to almost anyone with very limited resources and technical skills. This type of dual optical system is very effective detecting small "local" objects in the atmosphere in daylight in any clear sky. By using such a dual optical system systematically you will find sooner or later, actually more sooner than later, some objects that are definitively no mundane and respond to the description given above about the plasma-like life forms. These "anomalies" when observed systematically will inevitably lead to the observer to believe that they are life forms. Now I know that for some people this will be very hard to believe, but I challenge you not to do like the Cardinals in Galileo's time, it is up to you to confirm this observational claim, and as any observational claim the only way to verify it is to make the same observations, if you do that then you will find these anomalies that are really not very hard to identify with just a little practice, but if you do not nothing and "assume" that what we know about the atmosphere is almost "complete", which of course will be really naïve then you will never really know. I am attaching pictures of dual optical systems and one self-luminous anomaly:Life based on carbon needs very especial conditions to thrive...No, it does not. Carbon-based life exists under many conditions here on good old Earth, from terrestrial forms to extremophiles thriving in the deep ocean near volcanic vents.The genesis of Life somehow appears to contradicts the second law of thermodynamicsThat is a Creationist lie, as pointed out on the physics forum I linked above. The Second Law of Thermodynamics applies to closed stems. Life arose in our solar system. Actually, as far as we know, life has arisen only on Earth, and anyone who has ever walked outside during daylight hours knows the Earth is not a closed system. The reason is blindingly obvious. The universe is a closed system. Solar systems, and even galaxies, are not.If plasma based life is a reality...Yeah, if. If my feet would feet a railroad track I'd a probably been a train.Carbon based life forms could have not emerged very early in our Universe because the basic elements for carbon based life forms are created inside stars, so that implies that several billions years have to pass before these elements are abundant enough for carbon based life forms to be a reality. It could be argued( The Anthropic Principle ) that for us to be here the Universe needs to be as old as it is now, but that argument do not applies to plasma based life formsYou were doing we'll until that last phrase.So if that is the case plasma based life forms could be pervasive all over the Universe. We could be missing something that may be in our own backyard and we are not seeing it because we are not looking for that.With all the instruments we have trained toward the sky you'd think we would pick up some sign of an ancient life form pervasive throughout the universe, yet we have not done so. You have run with a fantasy and tried to turn it into reality with absolutely no evidence. Your argument is, at best, idle speculation. As Christopher Hitchens said, "That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence." Show me the evidence and I'll discuss this further.
it is up to you to confirm this observational claimNo, it isn't. You are making the claim, so it is your responsibility to provide evidence. Where is your empirical evidence? Edit: I am not inclined to waste my time looking for something you present without evidence, especially when you start your post with factual errors. You do not know what you are talking about.
The classic close-mentality answer, no different than the Cardinals in Galileo's time, but in this I am ahead of you by light years because I have been doing atmospheric observations for a while now, I really know a little more than you on this topic, and I am not inclined to say just a little, you really do not know anything about this, you are assuming, but what I claim is based in hundreds of anomaly observations, again this is an observational claim it is up to you to confirm that or not. It is not different than when Galileo said that looking through a telescope you will see Jupiter's moons, it is up to you to confirm that or not, or just wait for somebody else to do it and then you will have to take on faith because you have not seen it with your eyes like many things that today you take on faith because you have read it in some paper and/or book, but really you have not observe it. The existence of anomalies is something that is in almost anybody's hand to verify, but people like you will only believe what you are talk to believe not what you can figure out for yourself, you are too dependent to have any original ideas.it is up to you to confirm this observational claimNo, it isn't. You are making the claim, so it is your responsibility to provide evidence. Where is your empirical evidence? Edit: I am not inclined to waste my time looking for something you present without evidence, especially when you start your post with factual errors. You do not know what you are talking about.
Once again, you are wrong. I am open to new evidence. You have presented no evidence, you just bluster.
complex plasmas also are subject to the same emergent properties of self-organization. ...Sorry haven't read the book. (so many books so little time) But, what emergent properties? Being subject to gravity? In the 2008 book: "Elementary Physics of Complex Plasmas", by authors V. N. Tsytovich et al.(http://en.bookfi.org/book/455683) It is mentioned the "self-organization tendency of complex plasma" and the following striking fact: "that the description of electrostatics of DNA is surprisingly similar to that used in complex plasmas". From that it is really not far fetched to infer the real possibility of the emergency/genesis of Life based on plasma. Now how to look for plasma-like life forms? We should be looking for autonomous plasma-like/amorphous objects in empty space, objects that very likely are similar to unicellular microorganisms showing the same amoebic pulsations and/or configurations, but of course nature forms always will be richer than anybody imagination. These objects of course will be very hard to spot at long distance but not at relatively close range, also very likely some of these objects will be self-luminous and will respond to electromagnetic pulses, maybe they will be found in the high levels of our atmosphere were the atmosphere is very rare, if they already had been spotted and not recognized by what they are it is likely that they were called "anomalies".It's an interesting idea, but plasma isn't a kind of matter like carbon, it's a STATE of matter. Pump enough energy into an atom and electrons strip away to the bare nucleus. How could bare nuclei form complex structures? Sure you could imagine streams of plasma "self-organized" by magnetic fields, but wouldn't that be pretty much be random? How could it give rise to anything that would grow, reproduce, sense its environment, or do any of the things we associate with life (much less intelligence)? I repeat, it's an interesting idea, but it doesn't exactly sound plausible. Well the genesis of this post is really the reality of anomalies, anomalies are plasma-like/amorphous autonomous objects that can be observed in our atmosphere using dual optical systems. These anomalies have been observed by many people around the world, their observations are consistent in the sense that the observed objects almost always have this "plasmatic" consistency, like the self-luminous in the attached pictures. I had observed hundreds of these objects, anybody can observe them by using the right tools.
Once again, you are wrong. I am open to new evidence. You have presented no evidence, you just bluster.I know that people like you are very close-minded and will never recognized the dogmatism that reign in their wrong logic. Science is almost always done by speculation, any new theory always have speculative elements, actually you can consider any theory as an exercise in speculation, because at the end of the day what we always have of reality are approximate models that try to make predictions based always on assumptions that have to be taken on faith, like axioms/ postulates. Just to list some examples of these assumptions: The uniformity of space, many theories assume implicitly or explicitly that. The constancy of the speed of light, many "predictions" are based on these assumptions that we have no way to fully verify, so we always use speculation. Now regarding evidence, I have hundred of video footage of anomalies, almost always these recordings were done for more than one camera, I use a dual optical system as the one in the attached image, this dual optical system have an infrared enabled camera with zoom lens and a 950nm IR pass filter that is used to scan the sky for any objects. as was explained before by using an infrared capable camera the sky scattering of visible light is minimized and then its masking effect on small objects will be less than in visible light, that means that by using this camera we will be able to spot a lot more objects than if we use the camera in visible light. And practice had proved that this type of camera with zoom lens is very effective detecting lots of objects that are not visible to the naked eye. The footage that I will present will always have a segment taken with this spotter camera. Now aligned and centered with the field of view of this camera I have a telescope with another camera, whenever an object is centered in the spotter camera FOV that object will appear in the telescope camera field of view, that way detailed close-ups will be obtained from the object in the spotter camera field of view. To fully understand the footage presented you need to have a minimal idea of perspective and optics, the dual optical system used is dimensioned to make atmospheric observations and be able to "resolve" almost any small objects spotted by the spotting section. That means that whenever a standard mundane object is spotted it will be relatively easy to identify: high altitude birds, balloons, airplanes, drones, bugs. The observations are done always in daylight simply because the presence of light makes possible the acquisition of detailed images of the objects spotted and the use of high optical magnification beyond the 150x mark. I will be posting some of this footage soon.
Once again, you are wrong. I am open to new evidence. You have presented no evidence, you just bluster.I know that people like you are very close-minded and will never recognized the dogmatism that reign in their wrong logic. Science is almost always done by speculation, any new theory always have speculative elements, actually you can consider any theory as an exercise in speculation, because at the end of the day what we always have of reality are approximate models that try to make predictions based always on assumptions that have to be taken on faith, like axioms/ postulates. Just to list some examples of these assumptions: The uniformity of space, many theories assume implicitly or explicitly that. The constancy of the speed of light, many "predictions" are based on these assumptions that we have no way to fully verify, so we always use speculation. Now regarding evidence, I have hundred of video footage of anomalies, almost always these recordings were done for more than one camera, I use a dual optical system as the one in the attached image, this dual optical system have an infrared enabled camera with zoom lens and a 950nm IR pass filter that is used to scan the sky for any objects. as was explained before by using an infrared capable camera the sky scattering of visible light is minimized and then its masking effect on small objects will be less than in visible light, that means that by using this camera we will be able to spot a lot more objects than if we use the camera in visible light. And practice had proved that this type of camera with zoom lens is very effective detecting lots of objects that are not visible to the naked eye. The footage that I will present will always have a segment taken with this spotter camera. Now aligned and centered with the field of view of this camera I have a telescope with another camera, whenever an object is centered in the spotter camera FOV that object will appear in the telescope camera field of view, that way detailed close-ups will be obtained from the object in the spotter camera field of view. To fully understand the footage presented you need to have a minimal idea of perspective and optics, the dual optical system used is dimensioned to make atmospheric observations and be able to "resolve" almost any small objects spotted by the spotting section. That means that whenever a standard mundane object is spotted it will be relatively easy to identify: high altitude birds, balloons, airplanes, drones, bugs. The observations are done always in daylight simply because the presence of light makes possible the acquisition of detailed images of the objects spotted and the use of high optical magnification beyond the 150x mark. I will be posting some of this footage soon. What you are describing sounds a lot like atmospheric sprites: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sprite_(lightning) As far as being closed minded, I think you are probably posting to one of the most open minded groups that you will find. You didn't really expect to post something as unusual as plasma-tic life forms and not get feedback from people who are question your reasoning, did you?
Once again, you are wrong. I am open to new evidence. You have presented no evidence, you just bluster.I know that people like you are very close-minded and will never recognized the dogmatism that reign in their wrong logic. Science is almost always done by speculation, any new theory always have speculative elements, actually you can consider any theory as an exercise in speculation, because at the end of the day what we always have of reality are approximate models that try to make predictions based always on assumptions that have to be taken on faith, like axioms/ postulates. Just to list some examples of these assumptions: The uniformity of space, many theories assume implicitly or explicitly that. The constancy of the speed of light, many "predictions" are based on these assumptions that we have no way to fully verify, so we always use speculation. Now regarding evidence, I have hundred of video footage of anomalies, almost always these recordings were done for more than one camera, I use a dual optical system as the one in the attached image, this dual optical system have an infrared enabled camera with zoom lens and a 950nm IR pass filter that is used to scan the sky for any objects. as was explained before by using an infrared capable camera the sky scattering of visible light is minimized and then its masking effect on small objects will be less than in visible light, that means that by using this camera we will be able to spot a lot more objects than if we use the camera in visible light. And practice had proved that this type of camera with zoom lens is very effective detecting lots of objects that are not visible to the naked eye. The footage that I will present will always have a segment taken with this spotter camera. Now aligned and centered with the field of view of this camera I have a telescope with another camera, whenever an object is centered in the spotter camera FOV that object will appear in the telescope camera field of view, that way detailed close-ups will be obtained from the object in the spotter camera field of view. To fully understand the footage presented you need to have a minimal idea of perspective and optics, the dual optical system used is dimensioned to make atmospheric observations and be able to "resolve" almost any small objects spotted by the spotting section. That means that whenever a standard mundane object is spotted it will be relatively easy to identify: high altitude birds, balloons, airplanes, drones, bugs. The observations are done always in daylight simply because the presence of light makes possible the acquisition of detailed images of the objects spotted and the use of high optical magnification beyond the 150x mark. I will be posting some of this footage soon. What you are describing sounds a lot like atmospheric sprites: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sprite_(lightning) As far as being closed minded, I think you are probably posting to one of the most open minded groups that you will find. You didn't really expect to post something as unusual as plasma-tic life forms and not get feedback from people who are question your reasoning, did you? I am familiar with lightning sprites, if you really read that Wikipedia short article you will had realized that sprites are very short lived phenomenon, sighted and reported first by pilots at night and the final confirmation was done from ISS, let me repeat again: sprites are very short lived occurrences. What I am describing here are autonomous objects, tracked in video, sometimes for very long in daylight. It will be almost impossible to confuse both phenomenon, only somebody doing a very superficial observation can do that and somebody that really had not observed directly any of the two as you just did.
I will be sharing some video footage through the sharing file site MediaFile, by clicking in the link provided MediaFilre will open a default video player that is not very good, video quality is very poor, you should download the file to your local computer and use a video player to watch the video in full screen to see all details.
This first one was a plasma-like self-luminous object spotted on 04/27/14 and tracked from 4:08 pm to 4:43 pm in daylight. The object was not visible to the naked eye but it was spotted easily with the infrared capable camera. This footage presents one portion of the tracking where a bird is seen below the anomaly level. The footage will have a short section taken from the infrared spotter camera, in the segment shown the camera lens is set to 160mm, that is a lot wider than the telescope views presented after that. Immediately after the infrared spotter camera footage some close-ups frames are presented where some details of this object can be seen, like its plasma-like self-luminous appearance, then footage taken from the telescopes is presented. The first telescope is a Meade 1000mm telescope using a HD camera and the second one is a refractor telephoto scope set at 900mm using also a HD camera. The footage is time stamped in real time and the IR camera footage contains also azimuth, elevation information.
http://www.mediafire.com/watch/as3zma0epdw6aal/163112-01-anomaly-bird.mp4]
Again you need to download this file and watch it in your local computer to see all details. This is just one the hundreds of video capture of anomalies that I had done in the last two years. When some feedback is received I will be providing more extraordinary elements about this and other video captures.
oops double posted
I know that people like you are very close-minded and will never recognized the dogmatism that reign in their wrong logic. Science is almost always done by speculation, any new theory always have speculative elements, actually you can consider any theory as an exercise in speculation, because at the end of the day what we always have of reality are approximate models that try to make predictions based always on assumptions that have to be taken on faith, like axioms/ postulates. Just to list some examples of these assumptions: The uniformity of space, many theories assume implicitly or explicitly that. The constancy of the speed of light, many "predictions" are based on these assumptions that we have no way to fully verify, so we always use speculation. Now regarding evidence, . . .My understanding has always been that it is the speculation that comes first, then the evidence gathering stage, and then if enough reliable evidence is amassed, a "theory" grows out of the lessons learned from that accumulating evidence.
"I know that people like you are very close-minded"Why the need for that drama? You know there is a big difference between "closed-minded" and healthy "skepticism". If you are on to something you should be able to appreciate that other's skepticism is an opportunity for you to WOW them with your evidence. I look forward to seeing evidence - but please don't expect support for such an extreme notion based on your say-so alone. Time for some evidence.