hows 'bout WE ALL "take" OUR fucking tech back from these mother's .... WE PAID fer it ,huh ...let's fucking try that "option" 1st hummmmm
2 : “We already have the means to travel among the stars, but these technologies are locked up in black projects, and it would take an act of God to ever get them out to benefit humanity. Anything you can imagine, we already know how to do.”Extraterrestrial UFO Are Real : Ben Rich Lockheed Skunk Works CEO Admitted In His Deathbed Confession
Ben Rich Lockheed Skunk Works CEO had admitted in his Deathbed Confession that Extraterrestrial UFO visitors are real and the U.S. Military travel among stars.
According to article published in May 2010 issue of the Mufon UFO Journal …- Ben Rich, the “Father of the Stealth Fighter-Bomber” and former head of Lockheed Skunk Works,had once let out information about Extraterrestrial UFO Visitors Are Real And U.S. Military Travel To Stars
What
he said might be new to many people today, but he revealed the
information before his death in January 1995. His statements helped to
give credence to reports that the U.S. military has been flying vehicles
that mimic alien craft.
The article
was written by Tom Keller, an aerospace engineer who has worked as a
computer systems analyst for NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory.
1 : “Inside the Skunk Works (Lockheed’s secret research and development entity), we were a small, intensely cohesive group consisting of about fifty veteran engineers and designers and a hundred or so expert machinists and shop workers. Our forte was building technologically advanced airplanes of small number and of high class for highly secret missions.”
2 : “We already have the means to travel among the stars, but these technologies are locked up in black projects, and it would take an act of God to ever get them out to benefit humanity. Anything you can imagine, we already know how to do.”
3 : “We now have the technology to take ET home. No, it won’t take someone’s lifetime to do it. There is an error in the equations. We know what it is. We now have the capability to travel to the stars. First, you have to understand that we will not get to the stars using chemical propulsion. Second, we have to devise a new propulsion technology. What we have to do is find out where Einstein went wrong.”
1 : “Inside the Skunk Works (Lockheed’s secret research and development entity), we were a small, intensely cohesive group consisting of about fifty veteran engineers and designers and a hundred or so expert machinists and shop workers. Our forte was building technologically advanced airplanes of small number and of high class for highly secret missions.”
2 : “We already have the means to travel among the stars, but these technologies are locked up in black projects, and it would take an act of God to ever get them out to benefit humanity. Anything you can imagine, we already know how to do.”
3 : “We now have the technology to take ET home. No, it won’t take someone’s lifetime to do it. There is an error in the equations. We know what it is. We now have the capability to travel to the stars. First, you have to understand that we will not get to the stars using chemical propulsion. Second, we have to devise a new propulsion technology. What we have to do is find out where Einstein went wrong.”
4 : When Rich was asked how UFO propulsion worked, he said, “Let me ask you. How does ESP work?” The questioner responded with, “All points in time and space are connected?” Rich then said, “That’s how it works!”
We Could Power All 50 States With Wind, Solar and Hydro
The big oil, gas, coal and nuclear companies claim that we need those energy sources in order to power America.
Good news: it’s a myth.
Mark Diesendorf – Associate Professor and Deputy Director, Institute of Environmental Studies, UNSW at the University of New South Wales – notes:
Jacobson found that the U.S. can meet all of its energy needs with a mix of wind, solar and hydropower.
The difference between a failed alternative energy pipe dream and a viable alternative energy strategy is in having the right mix … and that takes sophisticated computer simulations using historical data. Jacobson’s study started several years ago by matching California’s historical power demand with available wind, solar and other renewable energy sources:
Jacobson has now developed specific plans for each of the 50 states on how to do it. Click on a state to see the specific energy mix which Dr. Jacobson’s team has found would provide 100% sustainable energy.
Watch this must-see 25-minute talk by Jacobson:
Jacobson also shows that the wind-water-sun combination would actually reduce electrical consumption (because it is more efficient than fossil fuels or nuclear):
So why haven’t we switched? As David Letterman noted when interviewing Jacobson, the main hurdle to switching from fossil fuels and nuclear is simply that the big fossil fuel and nuclear companies would lose a lot of money, so they’re fighting tooth and nail to keep the status quo.
Read our recent interview with Dr. Jacobson on a related topic.
And note that decentralizing power supplies is arguably key to protecting against terrorism, fascism and destruction of our health, environment and economy.
Good news: it’s a myth.
Mark Diesendorf – Associate Professor and Deputy Director, Institute of Environmental Studies, UNSW at the University of New South Wales – notes:
The deniers and scoffers repeatedly utter the simplistic myth that renewable energy is intermittent and therefore cannot generate base-load (that is, 24-hour) power.Diesendorf gave an update earlier this month:
Detailed computer simulations, backed up with actual experience with wind power overseas, show that the scoffers are wrong. Several countries, including Australia with its huge renewable energy resources, could make the necessary transition to an electricity generation system comprising 100 per cent renewable energy over a few decades.
***
Feasibility has been established by computer simulations of electricity generation systems by several research groups around the world, including my own …
Ben Elliston, Iain MacGill and I have performed thousands of computer simulations of 100% renewable electricity in the National Electricity Market(NEM), using actual hourly data on electricity demand, wind and solar power for 2010.Similarly, Dr. Mark Jacobson – the head of Stanford University’s Atmosphere and Energy Program, who has written numerous books and hundreds of scientific papers on climate and energy, and testified before Congress numerous times on those issues – has run a series of computer simulations based on actual historical energy usage data.
Our latest research, available here and reported here, finds that generating systems comprising a mix of different commercially available renewable energy technologies, located on geographically dispersed sites, do not need base load power stations to achieve the same reliability as fossil-fuelled systems.
The old myth was based on the incorrect assumption that base load demand can only be supplied by base load power stations; for example, coal in Australia and nuclear in France. However, the mix of renewable energy technologies in our computer model, which has no base load power stations, easily supplies base load demand.
Jacobson found that the U.S. can meet all of its energy needs with a mix of wind, solar and hydropower.
The difference between a failed alternative energy pipe dream and a viable alternative energy strategy is in having the right mix … and that takes sophisticated computer simulations using historical data. Jacobson’s study started several years ago by matching California’s historical power demand with available wind, solar and other renewable energy sources:
Watch this must-see 25-minute talk by Jacobson:
Jacobson also shows that the wind-water-sun combination would actually reduce electrical consumption (because it is more efficient than fossil fuels or nuclear):
And he shows that the wind-water-solar combination is superior
to nuclear, “clean” coal, natural gas and biofuels. As one example,
Jacobson notes that it takes at least 11 years to permit and build a
nuclear plant, whereas it takes less than half that time to fire up a
wind or solar farm. Between the application for a nuclear plant and
flipping the switch, power is provided by conventional energy sources …
currently 55-65% coal. Nuclear also puts out much more pollution
(including much more CO2) than windpower, and 1.5% of all the nuclear
plants built have melted down. More information here, here and here.
A banker for one of the world’s biggest banks also notes that switching to alternative energy provides certainty in energy pricing … and is usually a less expensive source of energy when long-term costs are factored in.So why haven’t we switched? As David Letterman noted when interviewing Jacobson, the main hurdle to switching from fossil fuels and nuclear is simply that the big fossil fuel and nuclear companies would lose a lot of money, so they’re fighting tooth and nail to keep the status quo.
Read our recent interview with Dr. Jacobson on a related topic.
And note that decentralizing power supplies is arguably key to protecting against terrorism, fascism and destruction of our health, environment and economy.
No comments:
Post a Comment