13th, Friday, full moon... it's started!

This is a thankless task: Moscow region residents (and others) kossuses for sale
With them constantly such (ex. there output) .
Then I soaked it in a galosha for a week: the fat came off, but the non-commodity type is still

Hello dear forumchane. I would like to know your opinion on the discovery I made. I tried to contact a specialist, but unfortunately I came across someone who apparently does not have high-speed Internet (so that I can check my data on a webcam without leaving home) and computer knowledge (so that I can unpack the photos I sent and open the videos I sent in different video players).

But since time passes, and the case stands still, I decided to write to the forum. The bottom line is this: I once looked at what web cameras show at night on the top of Krasnaya Polyana Mountain and began to look at what the s69 cameras show in the mountain resort of Rosa Khutor (altitude 2320m). This webcam is located on one of the cable car buildings. There is a bird's eye view. Now, of course, it is summer and there is almost no snow there.

So, looking at this camera from the beginning of darkness (20-22 hours), I noticed strange flying creatures
However, you can watch them yourself if you have high-speed Internet (at least 5 Mbit) on this site Sochi webcams, camera s69.

Of course, it will be good if you get to the period when there is no rain and fog, and at the beginning of darkness, because in the later night they fly less often and you have to wait longer when they fly past the camera at all to the light of the lantern. I call them flying snakes.

I also have a video, but it can only be useful for those (I can send it by mail) who for some reason will not be able to view the webcams. These creatures fly in almost any weather, in some groups and one after another (at the same time, they are very agile, come in different lengths and can stretch out, making turns). I would like to know your opinion on what kind of creatures they are and who to contact so that someone can seriously study this topic.

This post was edited by Izuchar - 07.07.2015 01: 15

The casket opens simply. Web cameras usually don't have very high-quality CCD sensors with a large lag. What you see is just moths that fly too fast for the matrix and therefore leave a "ghost" behind. This is easily seen by looking closely at the "snakes" - they consist, in fact, of several images of the same insect in flight.

The casket opens simply. Web cameras usually don't have very high-quality CCD sensors with a large lag. What you see is just moths that fly too fast for the matrix and therefore leave a "ghost" behind. This is easily seen by looking closely at the "snakes" - they consist, in fact, of several images of the same insect in flight.

Unfortunately, this is not the case, because I have repeatedly observed how in the daytime near this page and similar cameras, some birds and insects flew by, but there were no bifurcations ("big lags") of the image.

In addition, the "flying snakes" performing their pirouettes sometimes hung in one position and their bodies could not split in any way..
It should also be taken into account that these cameras at Olympic and sports facilities are quite high-quality, here is an example you can shoot with a similar quality camera, but at the foot of this mountain. In the evenings, starting somewhere from 21 hours to 22-23, I invite everyone (happy owners of high-speed Internet, at least 6-10 Mbit) to sit on the this one webcam, when it gets dark enough and if of course there is no fog and rain (or the camera is not turned off for prevention)!!! There you can zoom in on the image in full screen and click on the screen to stop the image.

This post was edited by Izuchar - 07.07.2015 08: 03

.. these are just moths that fly too fast for the matrix and therefore leave a "ghost" behind...

As I have already said, there are no split images because when ordinary butterflies and birds fly past the camera (in the daytime), there are no split images. Here is a video from this place, when there were especially many of these flying snakes (in between the passing fog, or rather clouds):

flying "snakes" Video!!!.

This post was edited by Izuchar - 11.07.2015 12: 00

Dare I ask, do you have any idea what the exposure (in simple terms, shutter speed or shutter speed) of a photo-video camera is? And its relation to changes in light conditions (day - night)

What's the point of talking about "shutter speed and shutter speed" when it comes to video recording (especially streaming for the Internet). All "photos" these are the screenshots from the monitor screen (still frames). Besides, pay attention note that in frozen images, the bodies of flying creatures are located in different positions or positions, which would be excluded if we were talking about a split image (then all areas would be strictly one blurred image). I still advise you to take a close look at the video frames and then you will have no doubt that this is not a defect in shooting, especially when it comes to very high-quality cameras at the Olympic venues in Krasnaya Polyana: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fFi3mi31zgg

This post was edited by Izuchar - 11.07.2015 16: 55

What's the point of talking about "shutter speed and shutter speed" when it comes to video recording (especially streaming for the Internet).

Because, oddly enough, any video (including streaming) consists of a certain number of frames per second with all the parameters inherent in photos.

ps: do you really have nothing to say about the persistent silence of the forum on your topic

zyzy: and if it's not butterflies (insects) why did you ask entomologists this question?

What's the point of talking about "shutter speed and shutter speed" when it comes to video recording (especially streaming for the Internet).

A video recording is a stream of photos with a certain frequency. The photo is taken not instantly, but for a certain period of time. The darker it is, the longer this gap is.

Because, oddly enough, any video (including streaming) consists of a certain number of frames per second with all the parameters inherent in photos.

ps: do you really have nothing to say about the persistent silence of the forum on your topic

I believe that most of the forum participants do not have high-speed Internet, so neither on the webcam they can't sit and watch the video posted on YouTube, they can't see it either - otherwise there wouldn't have been such rash statements about the quality of the shooting...

A video recording is a stream of photos with a certain frequency. The photo is taken not instantly, but for a certain period of time. The darker it is, the longer this gap is.

The fact is that the video camera shoots in one mode and it does not need to show something in the dark because everything it needs is highlighted by a spotlight and it shows only what is well lit by spotlights. In one picture, I showed that these webcams shoot everything synchronously, nothing without splitting I saw butterflies and birds flying past this camera during the day and there were no lags.

It would be a different matter if there were no floodlights and the camera was set to complete darkness, then your suspicions would be justified.

This post was edited by Izuchar - 11.07.2015 17: 35

The camera shoots in automatic mode and changes the shutter speed depending on the light. Cameras don't split during the day - you proved that, but you didn't prove that they don't split at night. Give a nighttime picture from the camera of a flying object that did not multiply.

The camera shoots in automatic mode and changes the shutter speed depending on the light.

So in the field of action of the searchlight beam, the illumination is the same as during the day, so all objects near the camera look the same - this is akin to a flash, when there is no longer a difference between day or night.

So in the field of action of the searchlight beam, the illumination is the same as in the daytime

Did you measure that it is the same?
The arguments you've given don't prove anything - just give the facts.
The video shows moths.

What is your opinion on the video I posted on youtube?

In my opinion, the answer was already given above . No these are not flying snakes, but ordinary moths, they are attracted by the spotlight, which is why so many of them fly there.

As I have already said, there are no split images because when ordinary butterflies and birds fly past the camera (in the daytime), there are no split images. Here is a video from this place, when there were especially many of these flying snakes (in between the passing fog, or rather clouds):

Your answer was absolutely correct: during the day and at night, the cameras operate in completely different modes, due to the light conditions. What we see is butterflies.

Your answer was absolutely correct: during the day and at night, the cameras operate in completely different modes, due to the light conditions. What we see is butterflies.

But one scientist, a professor (Doctor of biological Sciences), based on the photos and videos he saw, said that this species is not known to science. Your argument is based only on the assumption that this is a defect in night photography, although you clearly do not take into account:

1. that this camera shoots at night as well as during the day, because the searchlight acts as a flash,
2. and smooth changes in the positions of body parts when they perform turns, says that there are no repetitions of the same frames.

This post was edited by Izuchar - 11.07.2015 19: 05

But one scientist, a professor (Doctor of biological Sciences), based on the photos and videos he saw, said that this species is not known to science.

First, when flying, you can see that they are all different sizes. Second, what you observed does not apply to the same species, they are all different .

But one scientist, a professor (Doctor of biological Sciences), based on the photos and videos he saw, said that this species is not known to science. Your argument is based only on the assumption that this is a defect in night photography, although you clearly do not take into account:

1. that this camera shoots at night as well as during the day, because the searchlight acts as a flash,
2. and smooth changes in the positions of body parts when they perform turns, says that there are no repetitions of the same frames.

Hear what they are trying to convey to you.
1. This is not a shooting DEFECT! This is a consequence of the long exposure time that is necessary at night, even if there is a spotlight.
2. No one talked about any repetitions of frames. Each" snake "in the freeze frame is one frame during the exposure of which the object managed to fly the distance from the beginning to the end of the "snake". I won't say, but for web cameras, 10-12 frames per second is enough for a normal picture, so the shutter speed at night can not be longer than 1/10-1/12 seconds, respectively, but this is enough for such a blurring.

First, when flying, you can see that they are all different sizes. Secondly, what you observed does not apply to the same species, they are all different .

This is already a constructive dialogue. But, in my opinion, they are all the same - somewhere on 8-9 pairs of wings. At the same time, they can stretch and change the position of the wings depending on the position in the curve. It may be that males differ from females in the number of wings and body length. If anyone has seen the video, they probably noticed how light and fluffy their body is: at 20-23 seconds. If they are butterflies, can you give us drawings and photos of similar creatures from encyclopedias?

This post was edited by Izuchar - 07/14/2015 06: 23

Your PhD is a big prankster. I will give a counter argument. If these are "flying snakes", then where are the butterflies? There should be a lot of them out there at this time, where are they? Everything you can see in your videos: this is the flight of butterflies. I have been catching light for more than 30 years and all the movements that we see are butterflies, but there are not enough bats yet, or their number is less at this altitude. or they don't fly close to the searchlight. If such" Snakes " can only be seen on this camera, then find out its characteristics and try to find a similar one and see the picture.

Izuchar
The topic of "flying snakes", "flying rods", etc. on the Internet has long been chewed-chewed. Google it. You have already been correctly told that the photo shows "smeared" images of moths. And with "undescribed by science types of flying snakes" - this is for you on the forum to ufologists.

Izuchar
The topic of "flying snakes", "flying rods", etc. on the Internet has long been chewed-chewed. Google it. You have already been correctly told that the photo shows "smeared" images of moths. And with "undescribed by science types of flying snakes" - this is for you on the forum to ufologists.

Here is a graphic example: the first drawing just reflects the bifurcation of one image into many (i.e., several came out of one butterfly). But the second picture shows that there are no bifurcations of the image because all parts of the body are different. Therefore, in my photos there are examples when the "snake" making flying movements has a different configuration of its body, which would be impossible if one of its parts were bifurcated (or one of its positions at a certain moment).Here the body has a different configuration

This post was edited by Izuchar - 11.07.2015 21: 07

Figure 8. Mayfly wing movement pattern (according to A. K. Brodsky)
Left — side view, right-front view; 1-14 and 26-36-wing strike down, 15-25 and 37-50 — wing strike up

don't break your brow's wings. Let there be snakes. And newts. I've also seen them. How to put the flash - just butterflies ))) And as a night shoot-but no, winged newts )))))

Pictures:

P1010202.JPG — (805.36к)


P1010203.JPG — (818.21к)

don't break your brow's wings. Let there be snakes. And newts. I've also seen them. How to put the flash - just butterflies ))) And as a night shoot-but no, winged newts )))))

Perhaps you are right, and the flying "snakes" are just an optical illusion (I'm not lobbying for my discovery, but just want to figure out what's going on). I began to think about it when I accidentally came across the testimony webcams #60 which is only 250-300 m lower. There was once an invasion of moths and mostly they almost always looked like ordinary butterflies (although some bifurcation was noticeable)...

But if you looked closely, you could see that when some butterflies accelerated very strongly in front of the webcam, their bodies bifurcated significantly (sometimes they looked like "snakes"), and this despite the fact that the optical or digital zoom was clearly not screwed up in this webcam (after all, the goal there is to control the entire screen). an object, not a separate part of it).

But on the camera №69 the magnification is clearly screwed up (because there the goal is to track the entrance to the restricted area), and it is possible that the bifurcations are especially amplified when objects move quickly at night. Therefore, it is quite possible that we are looking at 99.9% still forked butterflies or someone else, because unlike yours an example , almost all the "snakes" have the same size and for all the time they have never given any reason to doubt, presenting themselves in front of the viewer in a shortened form (perhaps this is due to the fact that they all fly at the same high speeds, because the camera sight is moved far away from the place where the lantern and the camera itself are located then these "bastards" are in no hurry to slow down so as not to crash into the lantern and therefore the plume behind their bodies never decreases).
In general, I am grateful to this forum for its help and I will hope that the remaining 0.01% of doubts will also be resolved by themselves sometime.

This post was edited by Izuchar - 07/14/2015 00: 13

And you know, after all, probably the reason for the appearance of these "flying snakes" is that the light bulb that illuminates the area flashes at a frequency of 50 Hz.
Because of this, several images of the butterfly are obtained in one frame, otherwise it would simply be smeared.
This is what I shot yesterday under a street lamp:

Pictures:

zmei.jpg — (42.19к)

Well, there is a nuance, the frequency is 50Hz, but the current is variable, so the lamp flashes at a frequency of 100 times per second, otherwise we would see flickering at 50 )
By the way, these snakes can be used to calculate the flight speed of an insect, since it is known that flashes of light with a frequency of 100 times per second, respectively. the interval between bright and dim points on the snake will be equal in theory to the distance that the insect flew in 1/100 of a second, it remains only to somehow measure this distance relative to the shooting point
It is interesting to try to take a picture near the housekeeper, it has a flickering frequency of approx. 15kHz, in theory there should be even stripes.

And also calculate the shutter speed settings So you can test this theory - you have 13 (!!! )points on the snake, so the shutter speed was approx. 1/8, check in excel

Well, there is a nuance, the frequency is 50Hz, but the current is variable, so the lamp flashes at a frequency of 100 times per second, otherwise we would see flickering at 50 )

Yes, of course, it should flash at twice the frequency, 100 Hz, right.
The shutter speed, however, was not 1/8 but 1/10. Oh well, +-20% error

Yes, of course, it should flash at twice the frequency, 100 Hz, right.
The shutter speed, however, was not 1/8 but 1/10. Okay, +-20% margin of error

Generally cool.. the picture is clearly about 12-13 segments, the frequency in the network is always stable, it turns out that the error in the shutter speed of the camera, and not weak, 20% is not a little If it was really 1/10, then there would be 10 or 9 segments in the picture in theory.
Here, after all, nothing depends on the speed of the insect itself, if its speed, for example, was less, then only the length of the snake would be less, but the number of bright/dark segments with the same shutter speed would remain the same)

Apnu, or something? Well, any better topics with ads for prostitutes!

I agree with that. that "My World" is a book more artistic than nonfiction, and galavas about anti-gravity and other wonders - and at all a brilliant example of solid SF. And Grebennikov did it no worse than Efreov and Ologa-Horkhoi did. However, something there still has all the signs of documentary information. Let's study the text carefully:

P. S. was surprised to find that the alternativschiki nadkyrilya zhukov still examined and even photographed: http://matri-x.ru/energy/grebennikov_33.shtml. The pictures show (although very shitty) that no unusual patterns were found, including the yudolis. Although, it seems that these freaks experienced a complete brainstorm from the very fact of finding regularly located holes with hatches on the insect covers and were convinced that they had solved the riddle. And they began to mastrychit gravitsapa. It's scary to imagine what Snodgrass's drawings or any modern article with high-quality morphological photos would have prompted them to do.

Nevertheless, the freaks did the dirty work for serious people who are not in a hurry to chicken their beetles and helped narrow down the circle of suspects. It seems that all the diaries can be deleted, despite the fact that they are so often mentioned in other chapters of "My World". Probably, mass birth is the key to solving the problem. What non-small beetles fly fly to the light in the summer in the Novosibirsk and Omsk regions en masse, but not annually?

For a snack - a whole ball of flying snakes. And this is not some kind of banal view with only 8-9 pairs of wings, pictures of which are a lot of rood. These are unique royal flying snakes found exclusively in the Donbass, whose wing number is so large that no ornithoserpentologist has yet been able to calculate it.



The message was edited INO-01.10.2023 20: 37

  
Do you notice anything unusual here, apart from descriptions of fantastic phenomena?
4. Put these wonderful elytra on top of each other and gain power over the world  

I saw videos of dismembered elytra bouncing off each other - I immediately noted this moment and saved the video. Yes that's it - https://youtu.be/xLNN_2DHo6I?si=CbWqk0afTLJ2mGF4
I met a man who was in Grebennikov's circle - he and his young students did not concentrate on anomalism at all,or even did not mention it - all that I managed to find out.
Evidence from the category of "it's not it,it doesn't exist" - well, so-so.And what did you want to prove, what was the topic used for? Most of all, it seems, lawyers are tinkering with the " Impossibility of proving a negative fact." And you probably know perfectly well what is common around "uninitiated" educationalists - the construction of violas.in reality, the selection of supporting facts, but not understanding and ignoring the fact that even a single refutation is really scientifically valuable. And the lack of understanding that a fact outside the explanatory system / theory is nothing (from the same facts, opposite explanations can be constructed, which has happened more than once, but is now not on my mind).
"power over the world" - Gunpowder or compound interest was also not immediately used))

butterflies are clearly what they look like in the photo-"spiral". And can it depend on the light source that the video shows a "square phase"? .. and flies very fast up without changing shape. People didn't notice what it was - I had already cut it out of the recording.




This post was edited by CosMosk - 02.10.2023 15: 03

More like from the camera. This spiral pattern is probably the so-called "jelly effect", an artifact of the electronic shutter. Butterflies then synchronously flap their left and right wings - there is no place for a real spiral pattern to come from. I shot with a mechanical shutter - no spiralivdnosti not to be seen. And you probably have a newer camera, with very fast reading of matrix rows, so also without this artifact. Another possible reason for the spiral pattern is that the angle is not from above,but more from the side, combined with too long flashes of the light source, too long to rigidly "freeze" each illuminated position of the object in the frame. Here-here the lamp can affect - the shorter its pulses, the less samaza and clearly visible wings. However, if the subject moves very little in the frame (for example, it flies very slowly or freezes at all), you will get a classic multi - exposure-by superimposing a bunch of images in one place, there will not be a snake, but a hedgehog from a set of wings extending from different angles. So yes, the light source also matters. Ideally, it should be a disk strobe with a narrow slit (so that the dark period is much longer than the light one) and an adjustable disk rotation speed. Then, with the right selection, instead of snakes, you will get chains of clear butterflies, separated from each other by dark gaps. Once upon a time (before the introduction of rapid cameras) this is the only way to study the flight of insects.

In the video at the link - the usual electrostatic repulsion (and in some places-and attraction). And you can even see how the author of the elytra charged-stroking the wing of a cicada. So alternatichvschina canceled, you can disperse. My World, at the beginning of chapter 5, describes something very different. And starting from the place where the button levitates and disappears, all the signs of SF are already openly read. Moreover, SF is precisely the beginning of the 90s (which the authors, disguising themselves as documentaries, published in newspapers devoted to the paranormal. In almost every issue of them, somewhere between the articles about the snowman near Moscow and the curse of the broken mirror, there was a page about another unrecognized Soviet genius-the designer of a certain miracle device (usually ended up in camps or dungeons on an unfair charge and for that reason deleted from science). Moreover, the "gravitsapa" and the way in which the inventor came to the accidental discovery of the miracle, as well as its "physical principle", were always different, but the effects were of the same kind: levitation, invisibility, teleportation, time travel and impact on human health. Here's the first example that popped up from memory: an article with a title like "Soviet engineer - discoverer of teleportation". The following is a description of the thorny life path of a young innovator, who allegedly introduced magnetic conveyors in the metalworking shop in the 30s, which transported blanks and products through the air at such a speed that it was impossible to follow the eye. And then, quite by chance, a piece of paper got in the way of the part. What happened? That's right: the leaf remained intact - the item was teleported! Over time, it turned out that the teleported parts acquired radioactivity (which, of course, was discovered due to the deterioration of the inventor's health). Then the Germans came, and the plant, along with the already seriously ill genius, was under occupation. And what does it do? By repeatedly teleporting a paperweight back and forth, pumping it with murderous power and giving it to a fascist official with fatal consequences for the latter. The Germans were driven away. But a happy ending with the recognition of a genius, of course, will not be in history. Instead, as a collaborator with the regime, he is captured and sent to a camp where his already damaged health is failing. A curtain. Obviously, it is implied that before dying, the little man manages to share this story with a cellmate who miraculously survived and got out, but the article does not mention the source of data. Probably, having collected the above retelling in a correct query for the search engine, you can even get the full name of this Soviet Tesla, which I did not consider it necessary to remember. And maybe even a forum named after him with freaks trying to repeat it. And there are plenty of similar stories that come from the dashing 90s. So from the source from which Grebennikov could draw inspiration specifically for the fantastic part of the work, I also drank some water. And it tastes very similar. What can not be said about the entomological composition, which is original and delightful.

I didn't want to prove it, but to see it. This is the most colorfully described (but not drawn, because it is "impossible"!) star-shaped cellular structure that does not receive communion anywhere else in the world, the sight of which, I believe, inspired the author to write a fantastic story about flights. By the way, the EPS effect itself was allegedly discovered by him not then, but much earlier near the huge hives of Fabre, with thousands of tubes containing the nests of megahilas. To be honest, I haven't heard that anyone before or after him received such colonies. So try to dig in this direction as well. There is an idea that this is also an incentive: collect a thousand megahill caps, make them build nests and feel the Power! If you're the chosen one. And along the way, you'll get involved in mega-silo farming and increase the alfalfa crop (even if not the chosen one) . The man was very clever and kindly cunning. But the idea of a gravitoplane is an order of magnitude cooler - it's hard to imagine what could encourage young scoundrels to study entomology more than the promise to teach them to fly through the sky like a UFO. In this connection, your remark about gunpowder is inappropriate. The situation described in the book is rather similar to what might have happened if an obscure ancient Hindu who discovered the unusual properties of burning fuel-oxidizing mixtures, instead of burning them uselessly at festivals, immediately opened explosives and then hid AK-47s in a shed. I believe that in this case, he would have no problems using the invention for his own selfish interests. And he would still be quite well known, probably as one of the Hindu deities, perhaps even the most important. And Grebennikov in the" Sea World " allegedly did something of the same scale, if not more: yesterday he saw the effect on the elytra of a beetle, and today he flies himself at the speed of a jet plane, being invisible to others (in my opinion, just a brilliant excuse!), and at the same time also travels in time (but this is not accurate). But the most incredible thing for me is not even the fantastic properties of the device (in my opinion, clearly spied on by the classics of the genre), but how quickly its designer was able to find among industrial materials or make a fully functioning artisanal analogue of that wonderful star-cellular-multidimensional structure that is not found anywhere else in nature and art, which is not I could even draw it! Son, this is fantastic!

The message was edited INO-02.10.2023 20: 01

Interestingly, no matter how much I stir up dead insects, I don't observe electrostatics. Although the video shows exactly it. But why shouldn't this effect also be "anti-gravity" - antistatic? (the lunar module landed, for example, on the thrust of 3-4x engines holding it vertically from stalling to the sides). It is clear - it could hang on the push-off, but it is not clear where the further upward thrust is taken. The principle is apparently different. However, I do not want to prove that he did not dream up all the rest. Here are cellular devices with EPS that seem to be real.This is also shown to people in his museum (and in the people a headache was "treated" with a sieve). And even the device on the cobweb suggested - what's wrong with it?

And this is quite spiraling at the word level. And it should be - because of the change in the size of the span width,but I think here the flicker is superimposed on the flight phases and splits the image into an "interference" image with a different period.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/10756887@N07/20714491291


This post was edited by CosMosk - 02.10.2023 23: 08

Cool photo! But in this case, everything seems to be clear: where we can see the bar on the side, there is a spiral, where there is a top or bottom. You can even catch the moment of turning around the longitudinal axis.

Have you often stroked the separated elytra of beetles with the wing of a large tropical cicada? I doubt. The wing in the video is not a random object at all! In general, the electrostatic effects of insects are well known. Some studies even claim that dynastines specifically accumulate a charge to repel them from the substrate. Even on TV, it was shown in a completely scientific documentary program from the life of insects. Although I personally find it hard to believe - there are up to hundreds of grams of beetles, to tear such a thing off the ground, the charge must be like in a thundercloud. Here's a light spider-balloonists definitely use this effect in addition to convection.

There are eyewitnesses that before getting a lightning strike in temechko in the mountains, they were just getting off the ground. But this can be attributed to the consequences of a brain injury. And even if such an effect is real, the role of the lightning rod flyer is not very tempting, in any case, it has nothing to do with Grebennikov levitation.

As for the "EPS generators" that have been preserved in museums, when they were examined, even pranormalschiki trying to recreate the gravitoplane (in parallel with the mythical devices of Tesla, Schauberg and fuck knows who) could not feel any of the effects described by Grebennikov. There is a funny forum where they constantly complain to each other: well, I did everything according to the drawings, why doesn't it work!? In my opinion, not a single proof of the operability of at least one of these devices in many thousands of posts on that forum is not contained. Nothing but complaints about the lack of effect, occasionally interspersed with bravura statements like " I have penetrated EVERYTHING and have already learned how to control the universe without attracting the attention of orderlies!". And so for decades miracle-yudo is being made in garages, investing a lot of labor, time and money - poor people!

Personally, despite many years of constant work with insects, including bees nesting in reeds (although there were not many megachiles among them, mainly osmia), I did not feel the slightest hint of the manifestations of EPS described by Grebennikov. Unless the rain really makes me sleepy, but there may be a lot of other explanations for this besides the unknown force of science. It's what believers feel... So psychologists have already conducted a lot of experiments with specially made fake devices or actors - "healers". Most of the subjects "felt" the nonexistent effect.

The post was edited INO-06.10.2023 13: 57

Multi-winged flying snakes and anti-gravity beetles - that's another thing! Here I have found irrefutable proof of the immutable scientific fact that wasps use warp engines for flight:



Photo of the forgotten genius of Ukrainian naturalism, who left our forum prematurely due to the Stalinist-Putin terror. Found in secret archives.

The message was edited INO-03.10.2023 19: 06

let them also give up Latin