Jump to content
The Education Forum

Evan Burton

admin
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    4,419

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    16

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Evan Burton

    The Truth About UFOs and Aliens

    in Political Conspiracies

    Posted

    The time problem may not be a problem after all; mainstream science is beginning to suspect that we might not be so unique after all, that even in our existing time frame there may be a number of other potentially advanced civilisations.

    I'll see if I can dig up some recent articles I read.

    All that being said, however, although I want to believe that UFOs are alien craft (manned or unmanned), I have yet to see anything that I consider to be evidence. Credible people (including myself) have seen things that are indeed "unidentified" but there is still no proof that ET has dropped around.

    The Truth About UFOs and Aliens

    in Political Conspiracies

    Posted

    This is one of the things that perhaps the Higgs-boson particle might explain. If the particle exists, it might be possible to manipulate mass whilst leaving dimension unchanged. If that were possible, then faster-than-light would not be impossible (as you approach the speed of light, your mass increases; if you were to hit the speed of light your mass would be infinite).

    If FTL travel were possible, then visitation by other races becomes possible, perhaps even likely.

    Jim Fetzer responds to David Lifton's claims regarding 9-11

    in 11 September 2001 attacks

    Posted

    And precisely which FDR data are you citing in that last quote, Evan? The FDR data that the NTSB provided to Pilots for 9/11 Truth, which corresponded to a commercial carrier flying at 300 feet above the ground--too high to hit any lampposts--on a due east trajectory--not the acute north-east trajectory of the official account--and was 100 feet above the building at one second from impact--which means it swerved over the building rather than hit it, as my friend's trucker buddy reported. Pilots explained all of this in "Pandora's Black Box". So what FDR data are you talking about? This sounds fake. Kindly spell it out.

    The FDR data is immaterial to this point; so please don't try and change the subject.

    How do YOU address all the numerous qualified people who say it would not have affected the aircraft? How do you dispute the various videos of doing things that you claim are impossible?

    Jim Fetzer responds to David Lifton's claims regarding 9-11

    in 11 September 2001 attacks

    Posted

    "Ground effect" is a phenomenon known to pilots whereby a plane, flying at extremely low altitudes, encounters a sudden increase in lift. It can be difficult to descend further until lift is reduced. According to the official record, Flight 77 approached the Pentagon at a very shallow angle, very low to the ground, and very fast -- too low, and too fast, for too long. The ground effect buffer would have forced the plane to stay higher, and the pilot could not have overcome this. Reality: The effects of ground effect can be mitigated by changing the plane's angle of attack -- in this case, that meant adjusting its nose-down pitch. This low-level finesse would have been a challenge for Hani Hanjour, but by no means impossible, especially if he'd coordinated his final descent with help from the autopilot, which can make the needed adjustments easily.

    From: Ask the pilot.

    "In the aftermath of 9/11, I have heard many claims that a 757 could not possible have hit the Pentagon because the plane cannot fly so low to the ground at speeds of 500 mph or more. The primary reason given is that ground effect prevents this from happening. Is there any truth to this claim?"

    ...One of the pilots summarized his experiences by stating, "This whole ground effect argument is ridiculous. People need to realize that crashing a plane into a building as massive as the Pentagon is remarkably easy and takes no skill at all. Landing one on a runway safely even under the best conditions? Now that's the hard part!" While he may have been exaggerating a bit for effect, he does raise a valid point that flying skillfully and safely is much more difficult than flying as recklessly as the terrorists did on September 11.

    From: Aerospaceweb.org

    "On the evidence available it cannot be proved that ground effect would have prevented the plane from striking where it did."

    From: Journal of 9-11 Studies

    "So, to sum up: the mythical air cushion does not exist in the flight regime and configuration presented by FDR data; the assertion of "aerodynamically impossible" is being made in complete ignorance of aerodynamic forces influencing aircraft in flight; ground effect is not going to prevent a collision between an aircraft travelling at 460 knots and the building right in front of it as it passed, at extremely low altitude, over the ground."

    From: 9-11 Myths

    Finally, some visual evidence:

    JFK and the Moon programme

    in The Apollo Moon Landings

    Posted

    This might interest some:

    JFK Library Releases Recording of President Kennedy Discussing Race to the Moon
    On what marks the 50th anniversary of President John F. Kennedy's first challenge to the country to commit to sending a man to the moon before the end of the 1960s, the John F. Kennedy Presidential Library and Museum today announced that it has declassified and made available for research a presidential recording of
    discussing the future of the US space program. The meeting was held in the White House on September 18, 1963 and reveals President Kennedy's private concerns over waning public support for space exploration. In President Kennedy's address to Congress on May 25, 1961, he urged the country to make sending a man to the moon a national priority:

    I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to the earth. No single space project in this period will be more impressive to mankind, or more important for the long-range exploration of space; and none will be so difficult or expensive to accomplish.

    Over two years later, President Kennedy is confronted with the financial burden that he predicted in 1961 and, in the conversation with Webb, expresses concern over what Congress and the public would see as the high cost of the space program. The President also discusses the challenges he foresees in trying to maintain the American public's interest in space exploration when, in fact, there would not be a moon landing during his presidency. He says, "I mean if the Russians do some tremendous feat, then it would stimulate interest again, but right now space has lost a lot of its glamour.""President Kennedy was both a visionary and a realist," said Kennedy Library Archivist Maura Porter. "He understood the necessity of having both public and Congressional support if his vision of landing a man on the moon was to become a reality before the end of the 1960's."

    The President and Webb go on to discuss in great detail the need to link defense or national security to the space program in order to garner the political support needed for the program's success. President Kennedy describes this point in time as "mid journey" for the country's space initiative.

    ...I think this can be an asset, this program. I think in time, it's like a lot of things, this is mid-journey and therefore everybody says 'what the hell are we making this trip for' but at the end of the thing they may be glad we made it.

    Later in the conversation, President Kennedy comments that going to the moon must be more than just a "stunt". At one point the President said to Webb:

    Why should we spend that kind of dough to put a man on the moon? But it seems to me...we've got to wrap around in this country, a military use for what we're doing and spending in space. If we don't, it does look like a stunt...

    The President's uneasy tone during this meeting is in contrast to his public statements at the time, which were far more optimistic about the space program's future. A year earlier, in November 1962, the President and Webb had met at another White House meeting which has been described as adversarial. At that time, the roles were reversed: in 1962, the President was brimming with political confidence in the space program while Webb expressed concern that beating the Russians to the Moon should not be the space program's top priority. Now in September 1963, the President is faced with the challenge of maintaining public support when the rewards of space travel remain years away. This time it is Webb who reassures the President telling him,
    "it will be one of the most important things that's been done in this nation":

    President Kennedy:
    If I get re-elected, I'm not — we're not — go to the moon in my — in our period are we?...
    Webb:
    No, no. We'll have worked to fly by though while you're President but it's going to take longer than that. This is a tough job, a real tough job. But I will tell you what will be accomplished while we're President and it will be one of the most important things that's been done in this nation. A basic need to use technology for total national power. That's going to come out of the space program more than any single thing.

    President Kennedy:
    What's that again?

    Webb:
    A basic ability in this nation to use science and very advanced technologies to increase national power — our economy all the way through.

    President Kennedy:
    Do you think the lunar, the manned landing on the moon is a good idea?

    Webb:
    Yes sir, I do.

    President Kennedy:
    Why?

    Webb:
    Because...

    President Kennedy:
    Could you do the same with instruments much cheaper?

    Webb:
    No sir, you can't do the same. (break) While you're President, this is going to come true in this country. So you're going to have both science and technology appreciating your leadership in this field. Without a doubt in my mind. And the young of course see this much better than in my generation. The high school seniors and the college freshman are 100% for man looking at three times what he's never looked at before. He's looking at the material of the earth, the characteristics of gravity and magnetism and he's looked at life on earth. And he understands the Universe just looking at those three things. Alright, maybe he's gonna have, material from the Moon and Mars; he's going to have already a measurement from Venus about its gravity and its magnetic fields. And if we find some life out beyond Earth, these are going to be finite things in terms of the development of the human intellect. And I predict you are not going to be sorry, no Sir, that you did this.

    Just two months after President Kennedy's conversation with Webb, in a speech at the dedication of the Aerospace Medical Health Center in San Antonio, Texas on November 21, 1963, the President reaffirmed his commitment to the space program, embracing the challenges that the country faced in its quest to reach the moon:

    This Nation has tossed its cap over the wall of space, and we have no choice but to follow it. Whatever the difficulties, they will be overcome. Whatever the hazards, they must be guarded against.

    The recorded meeting is open in full without any redactions. Unlike many of the presidential recordings from the Kennedy Library Archives, the quality and clarity of the tape recording are exceptional. Today's release is from Tape 111. Approximately 30 hours of un-reviewed meeting tapes remain. Processing of the presidential recordings will continue to be conducted in chronological order.The first items from the presidential recordings were opened to public research in June of 1983. Since that time, the Library staff has reviewed and opened the telephone conversations and a large portion of the meeting tapes. The latter are predominantly meetings with President Kennedy in either the Oval Office or the Cabinet Room. While the recordings were deliberate in the sense that they required manual operation to start and stop the recording, they were not, based on the material recorded, used with daily regularity nor was there a set pattern for their operation. The tapes housed at the JFK Library represent raw historical material. The sound quality of the recordings varies widely. Although most of the recorded conversation is understandable, the tapes include passages of extremely poor sound quality with considerable background noise and periods where the identity of the speakers is unclear.

    Today's release of White House meetings is available for research use in the Library's Research Room. The hours of operation are Monday — Friday from 8:30 am — 4:30 pm and appointments may be made by calling (617) 514-1629. The recordings and finding guide are available for purchase at the John F. Kennedy Library, Columbia Point, Boston, MA 02125, or by calling the Audiovisual Department (617) 514-1622. Members of the media are cautioned against making historical conclusions based on the sound clips and transcript alone. They are provided as a professional courtesy to facilitate the reporting of the release of these presidential recordings.

    The
    is a presidential library administered by the National Archives and Records Administration and supported, in part, by the John F. Kennedy Library Foundation, a non-profit organization. The Kennedy Presidential Library and the Kennedy Library Foundation seek to promote, through educational and community programs, a greater appreciation and understanding of American politics, history, and culture, the process of governing and the importance of public service.

    (With thanks to Robert Pearlman of
    )

    Space Adventures offer flights to the Moon

    in The Apollo Moon Landings

    Posted

    Yikes, even more scary!

    When talking Soviet / Russian I would normally tend to agree, but the Soyuz has got an excellent safety record. Soyuz 1 (1967) had problems (parachute failure), killing it's pilot Vladimir Komarov. The crew of Soyuz 11 were killed when their spacecraft depressurised during re-entry (they weren't wearing pressure suits, which is now mandatory for re-entry). Apart from that, with about 109 manned flights, there hasn't been a fatality (yes, there have been problems on occasion, but manned spaceflight is a dangerous business).

    Space Adventures offer flights to the Moon

    in The Apollo Moon Landings

    Posted

    Scary, Evan. I can't imagine even driving in a 60's - 70's anything from Russia--let alone flying in it!

    Here's a KGB version of a GAZ-M-21 escort vehicle used by their Secret Service:

    gaz231.jpg

    It still looks cool--But, trust it driving to Siberia and back? Not a chance... :ice

    Like I said, I'm agnostic on it. I don't know. However, some of the photographic issues that have been

    raised were/are thought provoking. However, I'll stay out of that one, too--just not my area.

    Greg,

    Keep in mind that it is the very same Soyuz that is currently making trips to the ISS, and the Soyuz that will be taking US astronauts to the ISS when the Shuttle retires. Even the Chinese Shenzhou is based on it. It's still using the very same R-7 booster that was originally designed to lob ICBMs to the US (although the circumlunar flights will probably use the Proton booster).

    It just keeps on going!

    604px-Soyuz_19_%28Apollo_Soyuz_Test_Project%29_spacecraft.jpg

    Space Adventures offer flights to the Moon

    in The Apollo Moon Landings

    Posted

    Space Adventures and the Russian space agency are offering circumlunar flight, using a modified Soyuz spacecraft from the late 1960s / early 1970s. The price? A cool $150M per seat. One person has signed up, and another is in negotiations.

    http://www.space.com/11584-space-tourism-private-moon-flights-details.html

    Makes you wonder how they are going to pull it off if travel through the VABs is impossible....

    Moon hoaxers better start to figure out their reasons why it couldn't have happened. Bookmakers give the best odds to "They are in on it...", a tried and true favourite which is suitable for most occasions.

    Al-Qaeda leader Bin Laden 'dead'

    in 11 September 2001 attacks

    Posted

    Yeah, they have been talking a 'stealth' Blackhawk but I don't think so. If you are going to make a stealth helicopter you'd best start from scratch - using existing technology / parts (e.g. avionics) - but design from scratch.

    I'm wondering about the performance if we are to assume that is the tail rotor. The effective blade length is considerably smaller than normal: that would help reduce a noise signature but it means a reduction in power for tail rotor authority, something any helicopter designer would try to avoid. I'm not sure if the addition of an extra blade would balance the loss.

    If it is a 'black' aircraft, I can't help but think of a parallel with the F-117 Nighthawk and it's use - or rather it's not being used - during the 1986 bombing of Libya. It was scheduled to take part but at the last minute withdrawn; the USAF hierarchy were still not 100% convinced of its stealth capability in combat and feared a combat loss may lead to the stealth secrets falling into the wrong hands and negating any advantages the US had in stealth technology at the time.

    Al-Qaeda leader Bin Laden 'dead'

    in 11 September 2001 attacks

    Posted

    The release of a statement from "the general leadership" of al-Qaeda may do something to undermine the conspiracy theories circulating in some quarters that Osama Bin Laden is not dead.

    However, there will no doubt be some for whom even this will not be enough, who will argue it is not definitive proof.

    The message is also a means for al-Qaeda to stress that it remains in business and is committed to continuing its former leader's work.

    The US is attempting to exploit the death of Bin Laden to undermine the organisation. It is using intelligence retrieved from his compound to go after others, and trying to undermine the mythology surrounding the al-Qaeda leader to weaken the morale of his supporters.

    The statement also opens the way for al-Qaeda to name a successor. Ayman al-Zawahiri is one possibility although he is believed to be a divisive figure.

    (Bolding mine)

×
×
  • Create New...