All Activity

============================== Retyped for ease of reading : ============================== TOP SECRET HEADQUARTERS, ARMY AIR FORCES WASHINGTON Air Accident Report on "Flying Disc" aircraft near the White Sands Proving Ground, New Mexico D333.5 ID (16 Jul 47) 1st Inf HQ., Air Material Command, Wright Field, Ohio, 16 July 1947 TO: Commanding General, Army Air Forces, Washington 25 D.C. HQ., AIR DEFENSE COMMAND, Mitchell Field, New York ATTN: AC/15-2 Forwarded for your information. FOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL: Unclear signature N. F. TWINING Lieutenant General, U.S.A. Commanding 001 EN 002 ED 00E1 ER??? 00H4 ERR2? TESO GPP ?? PS PS Unclear signature (Holliday?) ????? R. ??????? Brig. General, U.S.A. Chief, Research & Engineering Air Materiel Command 1. As ordered by Presidential Directive, dated 9 July 1947, a preliminary investigation of a recovered "Flying Disc" and remains of a possible second disc, was conducted by the senior staff of this command. The data furnished in this report was provided by the engineer staff personnel of T-2 and Aircraft Laboratory, Engineering Division T-3. Additional data was supplied by the scientific personnel of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, CIT and the Army Air Forces Scientific Advisory Group, headed by Dr. Theodore von Karman. Further analysis was conducted by personnel from Research and Development. 2. It is the collective view of this investigative body, that the aircraft recovered by the Army and Air Force units near Victorio Peak and Socorro, New Mexico, are not of US manufacture for the following reasons: a. The circular, disc-shaped "planform" design does not resemble any design currently under development by this command nor of any Navy project. b. The lack of any external propulsion system, power plant, intake, exhaust either for propeller or jet propulsion, warrants this view. c. The inability of the German scientists from Fort Bliss and White Sands Proving Ground to make a positive identification of a secret German V weapon out of these discs. Though the possibility that the Russians have managed to develop such a craft, remains. The lack of any markings, ID numbers or instructions in Cyrillic, has placed serious doubt in the minds of many, that the objects recovered are not of Russian manufacture either. d. Upon examination of the interior of the craft, a compartment exibiting a possible atomic engine was discovered. At least this is the opinion of Dr. Oppeheimer and Dr. von Karman. A possibility exists that part of the craft itself comprises the propulsion system, thus allowing the reactor to function as a heat exchanger and permitting the storage of energy into a substance for later use. This may allow the converting of mass into energy, unlike the release of energy of our atomic bombs. The description of the power room is as follows: (1) A doughnut shaped tube approximately thity-five feet in in diameter, made of what appears to be a plastic material, surrounding a central core (see sketch in TAB 1). This tube was translucent, approximately one inch this. The tube appeared to be filled with a clear substance, possibly a heavy water. A large rod centered inside the tube, was wrapped in a coil of what appears to be of copper material, ran through the circumference of the tube. This may be the reactor control mechanism or a storage battery. There were no moving parts decernable within the power room nor in MISSING LINE HERE. (2) This activation of a electrical potential is believed to be the primary power to the reactor, though it is only a theory at present. Just how a heavy water reactor functions in this environment is unknown. (3) Underneath the power plant, was dicovered a ball- turret, approximately ten feet in diameter. This turret was encompassed by a series of gears that has a unusual ratio not known by any of our engineers. On the underside of the turret were four circular cavities, coated with some smooth material not identified. These cavities are symetrical but seem to be movable. Just how is not known. The movement of the turret coincides with the dome-shaped copula compartment above the power room. It is believed that the main propulsion system is a bladeless turbine, similar to current development now underway at AMC and the Mogul Project. A possible theory was devised by Dr. August Steinhoff (a Paperclip scientist), Dr. Werhner von Braun and Dr. Theodore von Karman: as the craft moves through the air, it somehow draws the oxygen from the atmosphere and by a induction process, generates a atomic fusion reaction (see TAB 2). The air outside the craft would be ionized, thus propelling the craft forward. Coupled with the circular air foil for lift, the craft would presumably have an unlimited range and air speed. This may account for the reported absence of any noise and the apparent blue flame often associated with rapid acceleration. (4) On the deck of the power room there are what resembles typewiter keys, possibly reactor/powerplant controls. There were no conventional electronics not wiring to be seen connecting these controls to the propulsion turret. e. There is a flight deck located inside the copula section. It is round and domed at the top. The absence of canopy, observation windows/blisters, or any optical projection, lends support to the opinion that this craft is either guided by remote viewing or is remotely controlled. (1) A semi-circular photo-tube array (possibly television). (2) Crew compartments were hermetically sealed via a solidi- fication process. (3) No weld marks, rivets or soldered joints. (4) Craft components appear to be molded and pressed into a perfect fit. Typing errors: exibiting, Oppeheimer, decernable, thity, dicovered, symetrical, Werhner, typewiter. copula

No.

These are government alerts; I know that the monthly testing of the emergency broadcast system on my TV is rather loud, so it may be that the government dictates this. Amber alerts go to Android phones, too. You can turn these alerts off, which I’m sure that Apple will point out. And likely have medical testimony about whether the alert can do this. But Apple has the big bucks, so they’re a target for lawsuits.

They lied about Roswell... twice... before they released what is now assumed to be the truth. The gov can't be trusted is completely justified, they lie their asses off when it suits them.

MigL pointed out that material has been declassified, and one of the links I recall said that when some Roswell details were released, there were plenty of people who still think there was a coverup, and still think it was aliens. The release did basically nothing. I think you overestimate the effect here - facts don’t make much of a dent with conspiracy folks. “The government can’t be trusted” colors everything.

https://globalnews.ca/news/8851556/apple-lawsuit-amber-alert-hearing-damage/ https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/44560022/Gordoa_et_al_v_Apple,_Inc_et_al I did some Googling, and the maximum output physically possible for Airpods is 100-105 decibels when in the ear. So if they're playing a sound at maximum volume, the maximum decibels their eardrums could be exposed to is 100-105 decibels. Apparently, the family waited two years before filing the lawsuit, but I can't find a source for this as of now, it was a comment made on Reddit. Is 100-105 decibels enough to instantly rupture a person's eardrum and immediately cause permanent hearing damage as the family claims?

- Will Rogers, in a 1932 newspaper column criticizing Herbert Hoover.

you're welcome...

I don't know. Occam tells me, it's nothing.

Desktops have undergone a remarkable evolution since their inception, shaping the way we work and interact with technology. From the bulky machines of yesteryears to the sleek, powerful systems of today, the journey of desktops is a testament to human innovation. With advancements in processing power, graphics capabilities, and design aesthetics, modern desktops cater to a diverse range of needs, whether it's gaming, content creation, or professional tasks. Despite the rise of laptops and mobile devices, desktops continue to hold their ground, offering unparalleled performance and customization options. Join us as we delve into the fascinating world of desktops and explore their past, present, and future.

Well it was intended to be "scary asm" (auto correct) sarcasm I admit to being a bit obtuse when it comes to humor, but the key to controlling nukes is control of fissionable material not secret blue prints. But my point is that technological secrets cannot and should not be something that is kept forever. In this day and age its highly improbable that a tech secret from 50 years ago is still relevant enough to justify allowing a rumor like UFOs to propagate through society. Admission that specific UFO sightings were being covered up due to secret technology would be a profound blow to the whole UFO idea of aliens. That is an important revelation my friend, to both ghosts and UAP but in the absence of evidence of such sensory interference or in the presence of a sighting (of either) that simply cannot be mistaken identity do we really assign the same probability to a supernatural phenomena that we do to a natural phenomena we already have an actual example of? I've seen a ghost, a crying baby sitting on a dresser in my grandma's house (in my defense it was as I woke up from a nights sleep) but it was real to me. I was also the only person to see and hear the baby, there were other people in the house. I was 12, even then I didn't assign much significance to the experience mostly because no one else heard the crying baby as I watched it fade away almost like it evaporated. Weird experience, makes the hair stand up on my neck even now to think of it. Now compare that to a sighting where what was called a day light disk is sighted up close and personal by multiple people. Obviously a structured craft seen by more than one person, still doesn't make it real but would anyone really put both of those in the same category? I honestly do not think so. Thank you!

Your point being??? Hubris won't kill you, it just makes you unhappy, until you die wondering...

Yeah more drive-by nonsense! Keep it up , "Make my Point"

It's really has little to do with how to verbally describe something. Anyone can claim this or that. The wording really doesn't matter. In order to confirm viability of those claims you need something beyond verbal or pictures etc. That tool is mathematics using known physics. A theory has no use whatsoever if it cannot be tested for viability. It's a simple truth I realize it's disappointing to hear that from me but I would lying to state otherwise. It's easy to describe a toriod under geometry. The mathematics exist for Bohmian guiding wave action so at least a large part of the legwork is available. That would be a good start.

Also 10Kg of it at about $4000/g.

Funstrating isn't it. You know somethings there but you can't define it. Any infinite quantity has a finite portion but the finite portion is outside R=0

Plutonium being famously available in every corner drugstore. If what you claim were true, we’d be awash in nuclear weapons - every country and radical group would already have them.

I don't, it was an assumption; which is cogent to the topic. Now where's the fun in that? 🧐 Bolded mine, is it though? This world has been walking a tightrope of disaster, since the revolution that produced a nuclear weapon, which, at best, is a tangential threat; bc there's absolutely nothing you or I can do, to stop the fuckwit that actually pressed the button, and it's not something we can change, unlike the less obvious potential disaster's...

All the Earth orbit crossing asteroids in the solar system of that size are known and tracked but if one were lined up for possible collision in one century's time lt seems enough time to dismantle that asteroid and scatter the bits into not-intersecting-with-Earth orbits. Would not be easy - a massive project that probably requires more cooperation than humanity is capable of? And maybe it can be exploded into a cloud of debris too wide and diffuse to be dangerous. If that were to use up the world's stockpiles of nuclear weapons - using them for good whilst getting rid of them for good would be good. Too good I expect. Something unknown, ie from far out, won't give that much time - a few years of warning (maybe) to do things that will... take a few years to do. If I understand right if the debris isn't scattered wide enough it can be as bad as hitting as one mass. A different kind of won't be easy, with a lot more urgency I suppose.

It's essentially doing what you are, it presents compelling anecdotal testimonials, often with multiple sources, and presents it for consideration of the audience and two scientist's, one a believer and one a denier. It's a bit rich to demand scientific evidence in the context of this discussion.

When the input signal is too low or confusing, the brain will make something up. That's how pareidolia works.

Let's try it this way. I've been specific in my wording. I've never said Bell's inequalities are wrong. I've always only said obviated or overcome. The reason is that the Copenhagen interpretation is just as true as the Holonomic Toroid. The explanation is in found in collision geometry. The Toroid precesses towards the screen, and its precessions bring it closer one wave at a time. It "collides" with the screen anywhere in the Heisenberg sphere and our sub light measuring techniques cannot pinpoint which precession causes the collision. From sublight observers, both are equally true. The Toroid, as a theory, has two uses. One, it gives a unifying three dimensional logic to what can obviously be represented in higher dimensions. It also explains how geometry can make space appear curved even if the same effect can be achieved in flat space and gravity as a higher order precession. Two, it gives a shape to engineer around, because it naturally accomplishes the toroidal superposition space while also denominating the hidden variables. It's the theory of everything because it also explains the Copenhagen interpretation, while the reverse is clearly not true, or else Feinman would have.

Exactly so. A value of a function being undefined somewhere is often part of a function's definition. It does not break math or anything. A singularity exists, by definition A notion of a particle "being there" is undefined, by definition

An important detail as Markus just mentioned R=0, cannot be defined The mathematics breaks down is the short hand descriptive. Its also not part of any finite group. We can't define anything particle related there as well. For the same reasons...if you can't define the spacetime the particles would reside in. Its impossible to define any particle presence