Declassified Technology notes Moon Bases UFO technology

K-illuminati

Wow, very good link

There is no doubt in my mind that this is real. It is very important to know that this is how are universe really works. You are going to get a lot of flak from people here who are stubborn and are not yet willing to accept that this is real. I just want to let you know that I know with out a doubt that this is real.

infamouskiller

Welcome and thank you for your time in sharing this information with us. Please don't let some people here get too you here. There are some of the best of the best here, you just have to give it a little time. I have not been able to look through the links and info that you have provided because I am at work but I will look over it when I have time.

In case any of you are not aware of it yet, there are some new interviews on the Project Camelot site.

www.projectcamelot.net...

A new interview with Dan Burish about Stargates and I highly recommend watching the 4 hour interview with David Wilcock. For those Dan Burish bashers out there, it does not matter what you say about him, this stuff is the real deal. Just watch the interviews and read the information provided and most importantly do your own research and you will find that this stuff is real. That is how I came to the conclusion, now just go and do it for yourself.

Originally posted by HaTaX
I believe the equation that you're looking for is:

V = Vo + 2 * a * ∆X

That's exactly what I was eluding to. I used the equation Vf=Vo + at. So to determine a velocity (or speed) as was requested (Vf=a*t), you'd need to know the length of time the object was accelerating. This is why I mentioned that we needed to know how long before somebody blacked out at 9gs so we'd know the time.

I don't think you were referring to me about being unkind, but if so you misunderstood my intentions. I'm certainly not intending to call anybody out as being stupid. I have a baseline physics knowledge from a year in high school and 2 semesters in college and the question you were originally asking (what speed is needed for 9 gs) does not make sense to somebody who knows anything about physics. A quick read about velocity and acceleration should clarify the difference to you.

thnk u I am just trying to give people a chance for solid proof by the us gov own admission isnt this truly unique as far as being real only one webiste can be named .mil and thats the military lol you can surf back to the DOD.com main site its a a link on there site lol

Originally posted by infamouskiller
9g's forgive me if my math is wrong isnt 1 g 650 some odd mph so 5400 mph wth kinda of convential rocket can do this

not sure if this has been corrected yet, but g's are based on acceleration, not speed.
1 g is normal weight, in-other-words, not accelerating.

Who said I was in the swedish military lol

reply to post by alkali


I was Confusing mach 1 sorry

I wonder when someone will ask why is the USA goverment spending tax money on a swedish aircraft.
Or further more why they are engineering systems for them???

Originally posted by alkali

Originally posted by infamouskiller
9g's forgive me if my math is wrong isnt 1 g 650 some odd mph so 5400 mph wth kinda of convential rocket can do this

not sure if this has been corrected yet, but g's are based on acceleration, not speed.
1 g is normal weight, in-other-words, not accelerating.

So at what acceleration would forces of excess of 9g 's 9-10 would be needed then?

Originally posted by h3akalee
Well what a good find and look at this little gem.

The Search for Planet X: Testing Inferences from the Kuiper Cliff

The search for planet X no less.

However, in this case they're not speaking about the "planet X" you are, most likely. They're talking about an object that orbits way out past Pluto and is responsible for disturbing Oort objects and causing new comets.

Not Nibiru.



(Mod edit: Shortened quoted URL. -- Majic)

[edit on 8/29/2007 by Majic]

Originally posted by infamouskiller
ok for the 5th time i will revise my question.

Try revising it so that you aren't asking something on the order of "how far is up".

in the tech notes the only refenece to speed i have got is that the aircraft is accelerating to a unkown speed well call this x and that the pilots accelerate to nine g"s of force before many test pilots crashing. in these super fighters at what acceleration would nine g's of force be excerted on the vehicle or pilot. You guys keep referring to if a object is traveling 200000000 mph you have zero G. thats all fine and dandy but how does the object get to that speed omg it has to accelerate which has what effect in the universe Gravity force.

The simple answer here is, at nine g's the pilot will feel an acceleration of nine g's.

As for "how does the object get to that speed omg" - let's try another tack.

Ok. Your car starts out at a dead stop. You begin to accelerate at 1g. At t=0, you will be going 0 feet per second. At t=1s, you'll be going about 32 feet per second. At t=2s, you'll be going at about 64 feet per second, so on, and so forth. "g" is not a measure of speed.

All at 1g. Any speed I can accelerate to at 1g in the car, I can also accelerate to twice as fast, or half. Acceleration is the rate of change of velocity. It is not a velocity.

If I want to go 20,000 MPH - I can accelerate to that speed at 0.1g. Or 1g. Or 10g. It's still 20,000 MPH in the end - it just takes longer at lower accelerations. You can use a 9g acceleration and end up going 10 miles per hour. It won't take long to get there but it's 9g all the same.

Because I am asking supposdly Free thinkers you sure do sound like the part of society I detest.

Tell me what I want! How blue is down?! How soon is away! Tell me!

If a object is at 0 mph stiill and accelrates to 17,000 MPH the Astronauts experiance no G force I think your the one who doesnt understand physics Isnt that what all the NASA training is about is G forces from the Rocket having these Forces.

But then again im an idiot remember?

Ipse dixit. If an object is at 0 MPH and accelerates to 17,000 MPH, the astronauts will experience acceleration DURING THE ACCELERATION. But not after they reach 17,000 MPH. How much acceleration does it take to reach 17,000 MPH from a dead stop? Any amount you like. 0.001g, 10,000g, you name it. The larger the acceleration you apply, the sooner you will reach that speed.

[edit on 29-8-2007 by Tom Bedlam]

Originally posted by infamouskiller
Who said I was in the swedish military lol

Originally posted by leonee
I've seen them fly on multiple occassions while serving the army in Sweden. It's a fine 4.5 generation jet but not a "super fighter".

Ooops...my mistake. Tell you what then, you might consider either doing a hitch...or watch that punctuation and grammer, eh? ;

Originally posted by infamouskiller
however in acceleration You expericance G's in Constance.Climbing as the faster you go I dont know about Space none of us can prove any space physcics don't forget it's told to us by liers,and puppeteers.

Sure we can. In fact, a lot of very basic Newtonian physics, which is what you're so confused about, you can do yourself with very simple equipment. After all, it was developed in 1687.

Why are most drawings of Future Vehicles show a spinning ship or space station and how it creates gravity so Inertia is something that is not fully revealed. NASA artist renderings have shown this many times.

I'll reveal all. This is called centripetal acceleration, and is in fact a deep dark secret if you don't know any math or physics. You might check out your washing machine's spin cycle - there's a great example of alien physics in action.

further more one only need to look at earth has rotation speed in space.

This is a very important observation.And a link to why so many pilots crashed them.

That's really creative in its own amusing way.

And how the oxygen molcules are effected by such great speed that the pilots can not breath.

Let's try - because under enough acceleration your chest and diaphragm muscles can't inflate your lungs against the force? The molecules of oxygen aren't affected at all.

mkay, not sure if my post is gonna help any, since InfamousKiller obviously won't listen to reason and keeps on babbling about G's like its some specific speed.

The Gripen has had lots of crashes in the beginning because the software wasn't good enough for the hardware (Gripen) at the time. The Gripen has small front wings that it can use to make very sharp turns and those turns make the G-force. 9G is very easy for Gripen, but hard for the pilots. Gripen has a max speed at 2 mach so it will never reach 9G on acceleration alone. ONLY when it does sharp turns. And the long times that is mentioned is maybe 10-15 secs max. Not 2-3 minutes. The reason the US military is researching a swedish plane, is probably because they bought some of them and wanted to improve pilot performance. Or they are working in cooperation with the swedes (through some NATO agreement?). It's very common for countries to buy planes from one another.

I found some of the Gripen crashes on youtube for your enjoyment.




And then a very serious crash, which luckily didn't cost human lives

well whatever the rest of you might think of him I would like to thank Mr. IFK for sharing his research with us. Sure has given me alot of reading to do.

reply to post by scarystuff


I'm not sure ANY non-rocket craft can make 9G's of forward acceleration on the main engines.

Looking - a catapult launch is about 3 g's.

The Navy has a test catapult that can supposedly put 6 g's on an F14.

The X-15 in its final configuration could accelerate at 4 g's.

The X-33 can accelerate at 4.1 g's.

So, I'm pretty sure any aircraft rating you see in this 9 g range is going to be radial acceleration in a maneuver.

I cant get the site to load. I keep getting sent to defenselink.com

Can anyone help?

I have a very good question. Is it possible that the term "EXTRATERRESTRIAL BASES" is in reference to the Space Shuttle, Lunar Modual, or Space Station or is it in reference to what I think it is? Take a look at this link, the report is dated NOV 1964.

stinet.dtic.mil

A Friendly Reminder

I understand that the subject matter is interesting and that some members can be a bit... er, "excitable", but let's please bear in mind that...

Courtesy Is Mandatory

Discussion of declassified government documents, moon bases and other novel subjects is quite welcome and what ATS is all about, but let's please try to watch the potty mouth.

reply to post by housegroove23


I'm sure they are reffering to space stations/skylabs and such. how else would you refer to these without naming each one individually. let's all take a deep breath and not jump to conclusions here. it is for now just interesting reading...unless one of us is able to actually converse with the authors of some of these papers.??

Thanks for your opinion on that "infiltr8u" thats what im thinking too.