Given my view that the core of the Earth is probably a 6-d toroid of vacuum energy orbiting the sun due to quantum vacuum "entanglement", I agree.
On Friday, December 6, 2013, Jones Beene wrote: > > From: ka...@kabelmail.de <javascript:;> > > Dr. Robert Wood, McDonnell Douglas Aerospace: > I have concluded that whatever the source of the propulsion > gravity control is, is the same as the source of to release energy. And > once > you find one you find the other. And I also think you probably get a good > hint on how psychic things work.... listen to > Secret Projects at McDonnell > Douglas<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=thLGknsJ2Qg> > > > This video/interview is definitely worth watching, whether you believe in > the reality of UFOs at any level, or not. > > In the strong sense of "alien life visiting earth from an advanced planet > light-years away" - the UFO phenomenon may have no physical reality in your > world-view (and it has have none in mine) but nevertheless, Dr. Wood offers > an explanation of how a superconducting charged toroid would be able to > defy > gravity at an attainable level of field intensity. (you will need to dig a > bit deeper than this video to understand what he is saying at the 8+ minute > mark). > > IOW - even a UFO skeptic would have to agree that this kind of antigravity > is ultimately provable and has arguably been demonstrated by now in some > black program, given the amount of funds which has been thrown at the > problem. > > As to whether that makes the alien-life UFO more "real" ... given the fact > that the saucer geometry can contain a toroid, whereas other more > (seemingly) aerodynamic geometries cannot ... well, this could be > "coincidental" even if the saucer sightings go back to an era when the > antigravity properties of an electrostatic object in a self-field was not > known... and thus the "reality" of UFOs must go to a level deeper than > physical - into the ontological question of "what is real." > > Is not a strong meme just as real, indeed more real, than a physical > object, > in terms of its ultimate influence on behavior? Is not any meme > transferable > without physical indicia? > > There is almost no doubt that the "UFO meme" is an influential reality on > earth now, and even a decent probability that the meme was purposely "sent" > here in a non-physical way from elsewhere. That is about as "real" as real > can ever be. >
