Re: Electrogravitics is Reality!

Tomcat,

Damn, you go on and on and on rather than answer a simple question.

Why the heck are you so defensive?

For the record, I never said you were a traitor, dude. I only said if
you were alluding to a top-secret aircraft like the alleged Aurora
aircraft, you'd be a traitor - so that COULDN'T be it!

SO, we're stuck with two other possiblitieis, the aircraft I suggested,
and the space shuttle which I didn't think to include because it flies
mainly on orbit and that would be way cooler than flying at Mach 5 and
300,000 ft.

The final logical possibility is that you're a bald faced liar! -
which I didn't even address because I assumed you weren't lying.

Please note, I didn't call you a traitor or a liar, I merely asked when
did you fly hypersonically at 300,000 ft, on what aircraft and what
mission.

YOU HAVE NOT ANSWERED THE QUESTION!

So which is it? That's all I ask. You have yet to answer that simple
question - re created here in multi-part form for convenience; I await
your response.

Tomcat, you said you flew hypersonically at 300,000 ft and were quite
comfortable despite the skin of the aircraft glowing outside. (favoring
a night flight) You said it takes technology to do that. (well duh!)

I found your comment interesting. So, please answer the following;

[a] I flew hypersonically at 300,000 ft on
[a.1] Spaceship One
[a.2] X15
[a.3] SR71 Blackbird
[a.4] Space Shuttle
[a.5] Aurora or equivalent [and I am a traitor]
[a.6] I did not fly hypersonically at 300,000 ft [and I am a
liar]
[b] I flew hypersonically at 300,000 ft
[b.1] _____________ date of flight
[b.2] _____________ mission

The astronaut office and other agencies keep permanent records of these
flights and who was on them and so forth. Assuming you aren't a
traitor or a liar, AND THAT'S WHAT I'M ASSUMING, you can view this as
an opportunity to document your truthfulness, your character, and your
skills and knowledge.


tomcat wrote:
William.Mook@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
When one looks at the economics and
logistics of throwing away a pilot after EVERY flight by sticking a
needle in their arm - and one looks at the value of ACCUMULATED
experience in test flights by a crew seasoned on the aircraft in
question - it not only seem unlikely that such things as tomcat
suggests occur, it appears UNTHINKABLE - especially when there are much
better ways to keep things secret - for example, by choosing
trustworthy crews who do not become traitors at any price - let alone
engage in traitorous activity of alluding to top secret information
just to get a point across on usenet! lol.




Theory and fact often diverge. Military, as well as civilian,
practices are often controlled by the equivalent of moral -- or immoral
-- fads. Our military/intelligence community is no longer a cross
section of the american public. It is the 'Volunteer Military' or
somewhat more accurately the 'Mercenary Military'.

In all fairness, however, to the military, it is a very large
organization with many different practices occuring simultaneously in
many different units.

As for "alluding to top secret information," this is something I have
not done at any time or in any way. Creativity, imagination, and
engineering skill are the things I use in my posts, not hidden
references to projects that I might or might not have been associated
with. I know of no recommendation I have made for a waverider that in
any way reflects the engineering of any military vehicle, other than
the fact that both the USAF and the civilian aerospace communities are
both working to solve the same problems. To some extent then there
will be at least some overlap of idea.

But MY ideas are My ideas and not someone else's.


tomcat

.

Loading