Soviet Army fought UFOs

Pravda ^ | 1.23.04 | Alexander Dremin

[Quix]

We shall see.

[Quix]

Not at all taken out of context.

Haven't you heard the speech it was in?

[_Jim]

Coast to Coast transcript:

THAT says it all brother: Truly Art Bell class!

I NOTE you cite NOTHING by the IEEE (and any of it's numerous societies) or any other professional organization. (Do you even KNOW who the IEEE is?)

[_Jim]

Haven't you heard the speech it was in?

All I know is: you're a true believer in this garbage and I'm going to bed!

In reality, guys like me need guys like you; you buy our our products and contract our servcies ... eventually!

[Quix]

Yes, I know IEEE.

They will be cited in due course, as I understand it.

[Quix]

No. I'm not a true believer in the classical sense on this at all.

I'm a true believer about Christ's deity, Blood, power, Spirit, The Father . . .

Not a lot else.

I HAVE collected puzzle pieces about UFO's and a long list of other fascinating topics most of my life. My relative working around them was just one of many sources.

Given all the disinformation, smoke and mirrors, it's difficult to say what will eventually fall off the shelves as valid, authentic etc.

But, I've read and talked to enough characters, I'd say with a significant amount of confidence and peace about it, that a LOT more will fall off the shelf as valid than you seem capable of imagining at this point. It would be great to see the look on your face when it does.

[Quix]

BTW,

IF

you are not aware of the RELIGION OF SCIENCE and the resulting fossilized rigidity and blindness . . .

then you are more blind than you think I am.

[janetgreen]

Thanks Quix for the fascinating article. I also await the Disclosure Project in its entirety.

[endthematrix]

747 service ceiling 35,000 ft
U-2 service ceiling 70,000 ft

[Las Vegas Dave]

Just after 9-11, I copied a gif from a Japanese web site with the UFO passing by the WTC just as plane #2 hits the building, this is the same video that was on the DRUDGE web site, but lesser known is the video taken from the opposite direction from a different angle some distance away, at (apparently) the same time.

The second video I copied on my hard drive, and just found it last night. I just reviewed that video and all I could find was the name of the maker of the gif, a Nobuhiro Hattori. I did a search on Google and there are lots of hits with his name, but not much luck, I then searched Google with "wtc ufo" and found the Japanese site. (I did not download the Japanese translation that Microsoft suggested, so I was unable to read the text.)

http://www2.justnet.ne.jp/~kiti/Ufo/wtc/wtc.htm

When you click on it will take a few minutes to load (on a dial-up modem) but well worth the wait.

Near the top of the page is video #1, scroll about half way down, you will see the second video on the left, and a still photo to the right of it, (the still photo has the path of the ufo plotted with small red dots on it, you can't miss it). At the end of the web site are photo's of Japanese newspapers with "WTC UFO" in English.

Very interesting stuff! I remember this first video was on FR and the usual debunkers were there, I posted that I estimated the speed of the moving blur in video 1 as around "....3000 to 5000 mph with NO SONIC BOOM reported that I am aware of", of course some of the debunkers commented.

[Quix]

HHHHHMMMMMMMMM CURIOUS.

I read the rest of my posts of Greer last night in bed.

I don't know if he's now talking about a different unit than I'd read about or if I remembered a projected schedule as though more of it were accomplished. I don't know which documents my memory was referring to. I think it was one of his more recent books. Will eventually try and check it out.

odd.

[Quix]

Sure.

I suspect that Greer and the Disclosure project are also somewhat pawns of the puppet masters to the ends that Werner Von Braun alluded to.

I'm still skeptical that all the ET's are as benign as Greer evidently believes them to be.

Nevertheless, I think Greer has a good heart and is accomplishing more toward getting this surfaced than the next 1,000 try hards have achieved.

I have a lot of respect for him. An MD doesn't leave a practice like his for a fly by night crazy obsession.

[Quix]

Thanks.

Interesting.

[_Jim]

you are not aware of the RELIGION OF SCIENCE

AND you would be wrong on that point ...

I've got devices (actual working physical devices or 'product') that I created ('invented' if you will) that defied the 'conventional' thinking (by the masses, or at least the 'masses' that know about and use such devices) at the time of their introduction.

I arrived at their derivation by thinking outside the box BUT within the established, WELL KNOWN AND PROVEN TIME AND TIME AGAIN laws of physics.

We have a saying, those of us that work with "nature's laws" that we have discovered, and proven time and time again:

   There is no cheating nature at her own game.

You can work with her you cannot work against her and make up your own rules.

People like you have no appreciation for actual lab work that either proves or disproves various wild-eyed 'theories' proposed by crackpots - which brings me to the second saying:

   The proof is in the pudding.

Which means - WHEN you build something, it either it works or it doesn't, and to date NOTHING in the way of 'free energy' or Zero point energy has EVER been proven possible.

Splitting the atom (HAVE you forgotten about this equation: E=MC²) HAS been proven to be the CLOSEST thing to 'free energy' that mankind has ever seen ...

[Quix]

Interesting.

Will need to view more carefully when I have moare time.

Thanks.

[Quix]

It must feel very safe and secure to be soooooo

convinced

that you have THE pristine, comprehensive, 100% accurate

construction on reality.

I understand your logic and consider it plausible to a point.

I don't believe your position explains a sufficient percentage of what seems to be 'out there.'

[Quix]

Your assessment of my IQ

and general levels of stupidity are not

admirable constructions on reality at all, from my perspective.

[_Jim]

It must feel very safe and secure to be soooooo

You're bordering on being an idiot.

Here you sit BEHIND a computer BASED on technology that was enabled by the very laws that you now poo poo ...

That, my friend is displaying "pure and sheer idiocy".

[r9etb]

Dang -- I'd never seen Rense's site before..... What a whackjob.

[aruanan]

Posting VOLUMES of material 'claiming' discoveries means nothing; either show us the beef and let experiments be 'performed' by legitimate scientists and researchers with *real* lab-equipment or risk being labeled a perennial crackpot - to date, this has not happened.

If you read the history of scientific progress, _Jim, you'd show a bit more humility. Your definition of "legitimate scientist" and "real lab-equipment [sic]" wouldn't happen to be "a scientist whose results fail to give support to such a notion" and "equipment such a scientist uses to obtain null results"?

Remember that from the time that dynamos were first invented (Faraday, 1831) to the time when they became more than 50% efficient (Edison, late 1870's) was almost 50 years. But it took only about half that time for scientific opinion to have taken what was then observed on state-of-the-art equipment and sclerosed it into the immutability of natural law. Edison said that he was going to make a dynamo with an efficiency that was greater than 90%. The rest of the scientific world said that anything greater than 50% was against the laws of nature.