Posted on 11/12/2007 3:53:44 PM PST by mdittmar
Have discussed such extensively hereon from time to time.
***I have not seen it. As far as I can tell, a Google search for the term “vesco” returns 22 results, and if you omit Robert Vesco who was some kind of scandalous financier, the only hits come from what I have posted. Similar for the term “Intercept UFO” and “Boundary layer control” and various others.
Am still quite open to discussing the perspective put forward at HTTP://WWW.ANCIENTofDAYS.NET
***There are dozens of books and perspectives at that website, rather than just one. I’m focusing on one book, so the readers will find it easy to get to the heart of the matter quickly.
Your Vesco contentions hold no attraction for me.
***I can see that. It goes directly against your comfort zone.
If elaborating on some term above would aid understanding, please let me know.
***Yes, that site you posted. Is there a readers’ digest version? Is there one book that wraps up the perspective? That’s probably what future readers of this thread would be interested in because they lack the time to dive in and would like one or two books to read rather than dozens. I would send them to Renato Vesco’s “Intercept UFO” as the ONE book to read on UFOs.
Your Vesco contentions hold no attraction for me.
***I can see that. It goes directly against your comfort zone.
= = =
A brazen falsehood, from my perspective.
I can be quite comfortable discussing the wide range of issues and aspects of the phenomena.
It goes against my
wanting to bother zone.
I’ve been there and done that all I’m interested in.
If that sentence is too difficult, I suggest you read it a dozen times until it sinks in.
You don’t have the ability to provoke or otherwise coerce me into discussing something that no longer has significant interest, to me.
Deal with it.
As I’ve noted elsewhere hereon more than a few times . . .
Guy Malone, founder of ANCIENTofDAYS.NET
experienced a number of abductions as a youth.
Finally was able to stop them via typical Evangelical spiritual warfare strategies using Jesus’ Name etc.
He rightfully asserts, in my view,
that those claiming to be ET’s are
WATCHERS/ NEPHILIUM/ FALLEN ANGELS
NOT to be misconstrued as demons per se but essentially in cahoots with satan as much as demons and likely coordinating things with demons etc. The distinction may be functionally moot.
The DVD’s from that site have a host of quality researchers and experts on them—not all of them agreeing wholesale, by any means but all of them worth a listen.
That’s the basics of it.
He has documented helping families who’ve had abductions for several generations bring a halt to them.
He’s documented what gives and opening to such goings on.
Having talked to him at length over 3 days, I respect him highly. He’s sharp, smart, wise—especially for his age—and funny. A great combination.
Kevmo: I can see that. It goes directly against your comfort zone.
Quix: A brazen falsehood, from my perspective.
***That’s an interesting perspective, Humpty Dumpty. In order to accuse someone of a falsehood they would have to be in the position to know the truth. Interestingly and tellingly, I notice that you skip over the Google results that basically show that your post #218 to be a falsehood where you claim about the Vesco evidence, “Have discussed such extensively hereon from time to time. .... Your Vesco contentions hold no attraction for me.”
It goes against my wanting to bother zone.
***I can see that as well.
I’ve been there and done that all I’m interested in.
***Here you’re making a claim which is not supported with a simple google search, if you claim to have done it here on FR. Please provide links to support this claim.
If that sentence is too difficult, I suggest you read it a dozen times until it sinks in.
***Likewise, prince.
You don’t have the ability to provoke or otherwise coerce me into discussing something that no longer has significant interest, to me. Deal with it.
***Then don’t accuse someone of a blatant falsehood. Especially when you’ve got one of your own to explain.
Guy Malone, founder of ANCIENTofDAYS.NET
experienced a number of abductions as a youth.
***Thanks for the summation of the evidence for that site. As I have posted, my pursuit of that abduction subject has had low ROI so I’m not interested. This is a thread about UFO sightings, so if you would like to invite me & others onto an abduction thread, you can discuss that stuff over there where perhaps there would be some kind of ROI for you.
Wrong again.
Your Google search is worthless.
I never referenced Vesco as I didn’t remember such names and rarely do. I usually deal with concepts and ideas vs names.
And, I was more generic than your post seemed to understand.
I’ve discussed such issues as whether the UFO phenomenon is exclusively manmade or not at some length hereon over many threads over the years.
I don’t really care whether you are aware of them or can find them on Google or not.
Your attitude and manner are not attractive toward dialogue in the least.
Good night.
post #218
typo alert
should be post 318
Your attitude and manner are not attractive toward dialogue in the least.
***Likewise, prince.
Sure. Pulled.
That was crazy talk, back then. Your’re crazy. That’s crazy. He’s crazy. You know.
Technology has been on hold for almost 100 years.
Most everything known about, or in common use, was invented back in the early 1900’s.
Today’s latest airplanes, jets, secret or otherwise, were all invented back before we attacked Nazi Germany.
Sorry for the delay. Things were busy behind the scenes. We will be speeding technology up on an exponential scale, or let’s say we already have sped up, to help everyone catch up, well....uh...we said we were sorry already, right?
......uh...yeah....what you said.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1924782/posts?page=288#288
How many UFO sightings of past years were just the stealth fighters we later learned of ,who knows what we are developing now .
Thanks for the ping, Vegas. I’ll be glued to my TV!
I don’t recall grabbing other posters by the throat and demanding that they dialogue about what I wanted them to dialogue about and that only; and that they do it in only the ways I wanted them to.
We usually find such cheekiness only on the part of shrill, disbelieving naysayers & government shills.
Quite a number of sources have claimed that some stealth models have dual propulsion systems . . . antigravity and regular.
I’d have to see a UFO up close and personal to believe. Haven’t yet.
I don’t recall grabbing other posters by the throat and demanding that they dialogue about what I wanted them to dialogue about and that only; and that they do it in only the ways I wanted them to. We usually find such cheekiness only on the part of shrill, disbelieving naysayers & government shills.
***It didn’t take you long to call me a shill, did it? Since you can’t dialog on the facts, you downshift into name calling. You would rather go on endlessly speculating about esoteric subjects than get down to showing the case for this particular one. Oh, of course — your mind is open and mine is supposedly closed.
Don’t recall
asserting anything about you being a shill.
I did note cheekiness.
And I noted that usually those are the characters
on these threads who display such cheekiness.
I don’t know if the shoe fits, or not.
But the observation is an accurate one.
It’s a bit interesting that some have emailed me noting that if they responded authenticly according to what they’d like to say to you . . . they’d get banned.
Your postings have generated that sort of feeling in others.
Of course, you are welcome to consider yourself as saintly as you wish.
Quite a number of sources have claimed that some stealth models have dual propulsion systems . . . antigravity and regular.
***Here is another area where we have common ground. The electrogravitics article was published by Dr. Paul LaViolette. I recently ran across his “SubQuantum Kinetics” theory on cosmology and posted it here on Free Republic.
SubQuantum Kinetics, wide ranging unifying cosmology theory by Dr. Paul LaViolette
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1884938/posts
THE STARBURST FOUNDATION ^ | January 2007 | Dr. Paul LaViolette
Posted on 08/22/2007 12:00:43 PM PDT by Kevmo
http://www.etheric.com/LaVioletteBooks/Book-ES.html
Electrogravitics Systems:
Reports on a New Propulsion Methodology
Edited by Thomas Valone
Integrity Research Institute, Washington, D.C., 1994
ISBN 0-9641070-0-7 $15 USD
To order by check call 1-800-715-9993 or, click here to place an internet order.
The book contains:
1) the paper entitled “The U.S. Antigravity Squadron” by Paul LaViolette (© 1993) which presents evidence that the B-2 Advanced Technology Bomber may use electrogravitic propulsion to enhance its flight capabilities. This paper, the first to reverse engineer the mysterious B-2 bomber was presented in 1993 at the International Symposium on New Energy (Denver, Colorado) and reprinted in Electrogravitics Systems.
LaViolette’s findings about the B-2 were reviewed in 2000 in an article in Aviation International magazine. Nick Cook, former aerospace editor for Janes Defense Weekly also has described these findings in his book The Hunt for Zero Point.
Shortly after it was published, this copyrighted paper was illegally scanned and its text was posted on the internet. Even though copyright notifications have been posted at numerous websites, postings of it have reappeared from time to time, often with the author’s name omitted. Please help to stem further postings by emailing the author at SphinxStargate@aol.com to alert of pirate postings. Also, if you have read or downloaded this paper, we urge you to please invest in a copy of the book Electrogravitics Systems. You will find that the paper’s nine diagrams make its concepts much more understandable. The book also contains other very interesting electrogravitics papers, described below.
2) The book also contains the intelligence think tank paper “Electrogravitics Systems” (prepared in 1956 by the Special Weapons Study Unit of Aviation Studies Ltd., a UK-based aviation industry intelligence firm). Formerly classified as confidential, this paper is now available for public view and reveals early interest by the U.S. and European aircraft industry in pursuing the electrogravitics gravity control technology pioneered by Townsend Brown. Paul LaViolette first discovered this paper in 1985 while browsing a card catalog at the U. S. Library of Congress in Washington, looking for information on electrogravitics. He was keenly interested in anything on the subject because the field theory he had been developing predicted the electro-gravitic coupling effect. He was surprised to find that this study, the only one of its kind listed in the catalog, was missing from the stacks! A quick library search indicated that only one library in the U. S. carried this study, the Wright Patterson Air Force Base Technical Library. He submitted an interlibrary loan request and to his surprise a copy was sent.
3) The book also includes the 1956 paper “The Gravitics Situation” (prepared by a division of Aviation Studies Ltd.), a paper by Banesh Hoffman entitled “Negative mass as a gravitational source of energy in the quasistellar radio sources and a copy of Townsend Brown’s 1929 gravitor patent.
Excerpt from “The U.S. Antigravity Squadron”
by Paul A. LaViolette, Ph.D.
.
.
.
.
LaViolette reminds me of the brilliant surfer dude with a compelling Physics theory. Lisi’s inspiration lies in the most elegant and intricate shape known to mathematics, called E8.
“Surfer dude stuns physicists with theory of everything” http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1925732/posts
Don’t recall asserting anything about you being a shill. I did note cheekiness. And I noted that usually those are the characters on these threads who display such cheekiness. I don’t know if the shoe fits, or not. But the observation is an accurate one.
***There you go again.
It’s a bit interesting that some have emailed me noting that if they responded authenticly according to what they’d like to say to you . . . they’d get banned.
***Interesting. There does appear to be a bunch of people who would rather go on endlessly speculating about stuff with little evidence than to discuss the evidence. There hopefully will be some among them who still have an open mind and will purchase that $5 book “Intercept UFO” by Renato Vesco and we can begin a dialog based upon facts rather than someone preferring to hide in shadows.
Your postings have generated that sort of feeling in others. Of course, you are welcome to consider yourself as saintly as you wish.
***Why thank you for that permission.
Good points.
Thanks for the reminder.
I’m sure some missed it other times.
Sounds and feels like you are still castigating in punitive tones and words those who decline to play your game by your rules.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.