A question for Don.

[Jeff Davis]

Don,
In the long time that you've been doing this, has it ever been determined as to whether any of this Skunkworks stuff is true or not? Taking ET home and all that jazz...

Please see past the terrifyingly dangerous "disclosure" word mention at it's beginning, and let me/us know Don, PLEASE, what do you think about the second entry on this page?

Yesterday, or a few days ago, Frank Stalter inspired me to look into the Kelly Johnson Case. Naturally I couldn't stop there.

I am most interested in what Don Phillips is claiming concerning Niel Armstrong. Is this utter BS? Thank You!

Kelly Johnson

 

[Decker]

Okay, good questions Jeff, but let me say this at the start ... much of this is speculation.

I never met Ben Rich but I did know people who did. We are all familiar with the statement Ben Rich made to a reporter prior to his death, that we had the tech to take ET home. Do we? Well I hope so and also would not be surprised if we did. (Damn! Now I must re-read Rich's book SKUNK WORKS.) These guys re-defined cutting edge technology. (And I also recall Herman Oberth's cryptic remarks back in about 1958 or so when he said that they had help with some of this technology that he and others worked on.) Rich also said that out at the Skunk Works they made use of Un Funded Opportunities. Was he just being funny or might he have been trying to say something by not saying it? I have no idea. I will say this however, if there really are crashed or downed ET technology somewhere ... these guys would have been the people to see it, attempt to back engineer it and make sense out of it.

The Neil Armstrong thing is not new. Almost from the first landing on the moon there have been stories that he and Aldrin saw something. I remember back in the 1970's, the story was that Ham Radio operators intercepted a comm that was on a different channel, not a public one, that said words to the effect of "my God, these babies are HUGE! They are sitting on a crater rim and watching us!" Is that true? I have no idea ... but almost all those lunar astronauts seemed to change dramatically when they returned. For example, we all know Armstrong became intensely private. He shunned the public limelight and retired into the background. Buzz Aldrin battled alcohol addiction. I personally think they did see things that should not have been there but I have no way to prove it.

Decker

 

[Jeff Davis]

Thanks so much for your input Don. I have always contended that we should never underestimate human beings.

Like so many, I sometimes wonder if what happened is that we came to realize that the German's had been working on intense esoteric (read: occult) technologies during WW II via paperclip, and that one other post war assimilation process whose name escapes me right now, that opened up doors to alternate, possibly Quantum based technologies, and that what may have happened is that we continued to develop these budding technologies to the effect of working antigravitic craft. It was related to me that the B2 uses excited ion exhaust streams to create lift at the edge of it's wings and in front of itself to decrease nose friction. I have often wondered about the more so secret stuff we have.

When I attempt to put the pieces together however, it gets quite confusing. For instance, the Triangles. For years I was thinking that they (TR-3B Astra) were this take ET home device, (or was that what everyone witnessed in the Phoenix Lights event?) but now we have reports rolling out of the MOD from the early 60s describing these precise craft right down to the red light in middle. Almost makes you wonder if these devices are bound to some form of secrecy wherein they (NATO Controlled, multiple country's best working on ET based technologies?) purposely planted evidence to make that appear to be the case.

Anyway Don, thank you so much for being here. I knew I could count on a solid perspective. That part about the astronauts is troubling. It really is. More or less gives a man renewed and deepened RESPECT for Gorden Cooper, who has always been one of my heroes. I still have to listen to the Randle show. That's tonight!

 

[Jeff Davis]

Hi Don,
I just wanted to share something with you that i came across recently. If one clicks on the link below they are directed to the US Patent and Trademark Office, or USPTO.

United States Patent: 7900874

Further, if one clicks on the "images" link that uniformly presents itself across the middle top of most all individual patent pages I have viewed, you can view the entire pdf.


Patent Images


Taken in context with some of the Skunk Works UFO subculture references to, "taking ET home", I was inspired to get back to, and share this with you. The proposition herein is made seemingly improbable by a described requisition for zero point energy, hence it's proclaimed inertial propulsion design intent. Inertial propulsion describes in and of itself, "propellantless propulsion". No more exploding shuttles and rockets. Obviously a tremendously valuable, yet at this point in time, utterly fantastic proposition, as far as we know.

Whereas this mechanism's function with regard to long range space travel would necessitate a seemingly endless ZPE fuel supply, however, a more so palpable question might come down to whether we have developed "alternate power sources" that might be used within the atmosphere, and without it to some real degree as well, to power such a technology.

Possibly light weight electrostatic rechargeable super conductor level efficiency fuel cells used in an energy management and alternation/conversion process wherein a possible high voltage charged ion self regenerating envelope of plasma results. Such a device could be situated apart from ZPE within such an envelope to facilitate this mechanism whose facilitation is described as forwarding inertial propulsion.

Consider such a technology at work in the aerial device observed visually, and simultaneously painted multiple times on radar by two F16 jet interceptors, in Belgium, on March 30/31 1990. http://www.ufocasebook.com/belgianreport.html


This device was able to drop approximately 7000 feet in the course of a single second as it eluding radar imagery by evasively moving too low to be monitored. Only to repeat this behavior for the interceptors numerous times.

Such a device as this one provided here, as proclaimed via it's patented design, would provide facilitation to power such intense aerial operations by disposing of the natural gravitational field effects that result in equal and opposing physical interactions that would normally obliterate the standard model of our best jet aircraft propulsion mechanisms performing such a maneuver.

Thanks As Always for Your Considerations Don.

 

[Decker]

That was a very nice catch Jeff. The patent office is undoubtedly filled with these types of patents. A treasure trove of information there but who has time and patience to go through it? I am convinced that this material is buried so deep in the military/industrial complex that it will never see the light of day by we peons.

Decker