Earth Day – My Contact Experience

[scar7]

quote "It WAS perfectly directed at my eyes"

if this was so wouldnt it mean some kind of laser ?
you might want to visit an optician as they can cause very serious damage

edit for further thought

No laser. It was a beam of light. It was beautiful. I stated it was a soft blind. It did not hurt. It was delicate. Weird. Wish everyone on the web was there. Wish people could of seen the second light beam also. Oh well...

imho truly important things are usually said in very short sentences

I think the 9-11 commission report, the Patriot Act I & II, Project Blue Book, the laws of all nations, U.N. sanctions, testimonies, and many books have extensive sentences and they seem to be important. What sentences do you think are to long :?: Are you stating a quote from someone famous :?: I leave my vagueness at the door when I enter into forums, and I try very hard to condense my telling for people that like sound bites. Please copy and paste my testimony onto your computer and condense it for me so it can fit your category of important, so you can teach me a lesson. I love learning.

 

[scar7]

...It gets rid of all that annoying einstein-ian relativity stuff.

For all that it's worth, the theory of relativity is being currently challenged by two scientist and their work is going through peer review right now. It states the further you go into the universe, the more the laws of physics change. Their work also points out other things that can rewrite what we think we know.

I don't know how it happened but it did, and maybe it is in the realm of relativity somehow, something I have been exposed to by the "light craft" in the Earth Day sightings, and I am currently unaware of it. :? Just for the record, I dont think they implanted a chip in my head because I would of noticed them doing that. I don’t have much to go on, but I have read through the bible and it seems there was a person that had this telepathic communication with "god". Also Spider Man can offer some insight. :lol: It's truly a mystery.

...Oh, and i hope you don't think i'm being rude, but do you have some of your answers pre-prepared and saved?...

Contrary from what one might believe about me, I dont take quick offense. Only when needed. I have saved answers on my computer but whats funny I have never used them. Some questions are structured similar but they all have their special difference. The Mr. Dick thing was answered as soon as mentioned through my special abilities to type ; no saved statements needed. But I think I have saved only 20% of them, the Mr. Dick one included. But not this one or any other ones on this thread. I save them only to better understand myself, and distinguishing myself from others like Mr. Dick gives me a better perspective of myself. That is why I appreciated the comment of me being like Mr. Dick.

 

[WhistlingJack]

I think the discussion on this thread might be a little more constructive if there was less sarcasm involved - please all of you try and keep that in mind for further posts.

 

[Mythopoeika]

No, it's just a theory.

A theory from where?

A theory from my mind, via the route of scientific reasoning and deduction, and much guesswork.

Why?

So you were just using your imagination. I just wanted to know so I could take a look at your source. But since it's from your mind alone it will be a little hard for me to look at that source. Cool theory though.

I formulated this theory independently about 10 years ago (I think), but in recent years NASA have been talking about using gas plasma as radiation shielding technology (it turns out the idea has been around for a long time - see link below).
It has also been proposed for use with stealth technology.
Also in recent years, I believe the DoD and Princeton University in the US have been experimenting with the use of a gas plasma 'spike' in front of aircraft to make them fly faster.
Lovely clicky links below:

http://www.princeton.edu/mae/people... Proceedings/2001_AIAA-Anaheim-3062-Miles.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_stealth
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19670029898_1967029898.pdf
http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/P14.pdf

 

[scar7]

I formulated this theory independently about 10 years ago (I think), but in recent years NASA have been talking about using gas plasma as radiation shielding technology (it turns out the idea has been around for a long time - see link below).
It has also been proposed for use with stealth technology.
Also in recent years, I believe the DoD and Princeton University in the US have been experimenting with the use of a gas plasma 'spike' in front of aircraft to make them fly faster.
Lovely clicky links below:...

Thanks man

 

[scar7]

I think the discussion on this thread might be a little more constructive if there was less sarcasm involved - please all of you try and keep that in mind for further posts.

Waaaa????..... All of us? Me?

One thing I dislike more than general users spamming, are moderators giving there two sense in where not needed. Your comment is not even on topic. Do you have some control issues? Where does sarcasm and being more constructive, together, violate the guidelines of this forum. You need to keep that in mind for YOUR further posts (not sarcasm, fact). Taking away our right to express ourselves... Plus another moderator already mentioned something that was appropriate to mention (that can serve as an example for you).

Point out the sarcasm so we can all learn something, even though it does not matter since it does not go against the guidelines. You just might find out you are looking at the glass half empty, or have an ulterior motive besides patrolling the area. I suggest you delete your comment and this one as it is irrelevant to the subject matter, thus containing a sp***ing element. Wait, where is the spa***ng button? Freedom is a right not something to toy with, and you are toying with Freedom and putting a slant on this thread.Your title should be removed. Humble but straight forward.

 

[stu neville]

I think the discussion on this thread might be a little more constructive if there was less sarcasm involved - please all of you try and keep that in mind for further posts.

Waaaa????..... All of us? Me?

One thing I dislike more than general users spamming, are moderators giving there two sense in where not needed.

That would be two cents, and in my judgement was entirely justified. If you have any further comments or concerns regarding the level of moderation address them to me, via PM.

Furthermore, think carefully before throwing around accusations about spamming.

 

[WhistlingJack]

I think the discussion on this thread might be a little more constructive if there was less sarcasm involved - please all of you try and keep that in mind for further posts.

Waaaa????..... All of us? Me?

One thing I dislike more than general users spamming, are moderators giving there two sense in where not needed.

Yes, even you. Reading your earlier posts in this thread, you seem to have a problem with moderators - in turn, I have a problem with argumentative posters who have a problem with being moderated.

Your comment is not even on topic.

No... it was in response to the degenerating tone of the preceding posts - try reading the thread again.

Do you have some control issues?

No, I'm fine thanks. I think you might, though.

Where does sarcasm and being more constructive, together, violate the guidelines of this forum.

Read the forum rules.

You need to keep that in mind for YOUR further posts (not sarcasm, fact).

If my post really offended you so, then please report it.

You just might find out you are looking at the glass half empty, or have an ulterior motive besides patrolling the area.

Curses! You rumbled my evil plan! I would have got away with it too if it wasn't for your razor-sharp powers of perception...

I suggest you delete your comment and this one as it is irrelevant to the subject matter, thus containing a sp***ing element. Wait, where is the spa***ng button? Freedom is a right not something to toy with, and you are toying with Freedom and putting a slant on this thread.Your title should be removed. Humble but straight forward.

1: No

2: No, it isn't

3: No, it doesn't

4: Try the 'report post' button

5: I agree

6: No, I'm not - really, I'm not

7: That will be for others to decide

 

[scar7]

Earth Day - "UFO"

So I have decided to try and calculate the speed of the object. This is merely a rough estimate and other factors obviously have to be addressed. The picture below is from Google Earth. The pic on the left was originally three sections of the sky from my zenith to the point it was no longer visible. So I want to start out by placing the "object" at 10 miles in altitude. I then pretended to be the "craft" and then just counted to one minute hitting my mouse button so often to determine how far out the object probably went. At this rough estimation, I placed the object over the ocean as you see in the upper right hand corner. Calculating the mileage per Google map, the object seemed to be 80 miles out. The Earth curves approximately 6 feet in 9 miles. I then calculate the curve to be 52 feet in 80 miles. I am still trying to understand how altitude plays into it all; perhaps putting the object closer or further, especially not knowing the true altitude, even though I can obviously range it from 6 feet up into space. But just going off 50,000 feet, and the very rough estimation of clicking my mouse over the ocean, the object would had to be moving at 5,000 miles per hour/ Mach 7.
http://i1181.photobucket.com/albums/x42 ... 1287561675
So than what goes 5,000 miles per hour in 2007. I go to google and X-43A or Hyper-X pops up: http://articles.cnn.com/2004-03-24/tech ... _s=PM:TECH

In such March 25, 2004 article it states, "It will be the first time aircraft have detached in mid-flight for hypersonic flight. We've never separated two vehicles going Mach 5," said Leslie Williams, spokeswoman for NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center which is overseeing the test. "That's just never happened. It's a very risky thing."

Speeding up to 2007, I then compare Hyper-X to what I saw, nothing still makes sense. I understand 3 years later we could have made some improvements but looking at the propulsion system and thinking of the effects it creates in the atmosphere, it does not jive well together with my first sighting; as no trails existed and other descriptions I have made on this thread.
Propulsion System of the Hyper-X/ ramjet:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E3lLQhem ... r_embedded
www.youtube.com/watch?v=x83KeVAzth0&feature=related
www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0KJwa5iWTY&feature=related

Then comes this YouTube Video reporting Mach 10 capabilities:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IiBsD-ca ... r_embedded

This is just to get started. Some insight would be great though.

 

[Pietro_Mercurios]

Thread re-opened. One Post removed.

Any flaming, or spamming, will be dealt with accordingly.

Any further questions, or problems with Posts, please PM the Moderators, or press the Report button.

P_M

 

[Pietro_Mercurios]

Two 'Earthday' Threads merged.

P_M