Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
TellLieVision

Upcoming Bob Lazar/UFOs/ Area 51 doc

273 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

stereologist
9 hours ago, OverSword said:

You really should try looking things up before posting your opinion as fact. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._security_clearance_terms

It’s a pretty easy thing to do. But without looking it up I’ll agree you are probably right about the janitors, but perhaps not on bases that the existence of is denied. Maybe you would like to research that and back your janitor claim up?

Thanks. I was not aware that the DOE was using its own system. I am well aware of the standard levels plus the NATO clearance levels.

I have worked at military bases that do not train or house large numbers of enlistees. Maintenance and janitorial services were contracted out. None of that staff has any form of clearance. The ceilings have flashing lights that are turned on when the staff enters a room for cleaning. All materials must be locked up. Screens are turned off. White boards are erased. Papers are placed  in locked cabinets. All lockable containers must be locked. And so forth.

If Lazar worked as a janitor he required no special clearance. He'd be carefully monitored and even in areas where the area is cleaned up.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OverSword
15 minutes ago, Dejarma said:

Like me= I doubt Trelane could be bothered to! It's all there if you want to see it.. we all know it.. we all get it.. the fact that you refuse to see it proves to me you believe it- just won't admit it.. 

I've come across many like your good self over the years in places like this:

intelligent people's logic in conflict with a deep down strong fantasy.. You're confused & disorientated (your posts prove this to me 100%) it's a constant struggle for you- .. What you need to do is pretty much= <pick-a-side> & be done with it!

You'll feel better= I did

Just some advice.... I'm done.  Have fun;)

Peace.

Dej...

BS. People, even you I believe, ask me where I got a piece of information I posted, I tell them where, where to look or provide a link. This guy made several claims about this subject which I have not heard but refuses to make any effort to substantiate them. Nice try.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dejarma
21 minutes ago, stereologist said:

Thanks. I was not aware that the DOE was using its own system. I am well aware of the standard levels plus the NATO clearance levels.

I have worked at military bases that do not train or house large numbers of enlistees. Maintenance and janitorial services were contracted out. None of that staff has any form of clearance. The ceilings have flashing lights that are turned on when the staff enters a room for cleaning. All materials must be locked up. Screens are turned off. White boards are erased. Papers are placed  in locked cabinets. All lockable containers must be locked. And so forth.

If Lazar worked as a janitor he required no special clearance. He'd be carefully monitored and even in areas where the area is cleaned up.

So sometimes folk get small details wrong- it doesn't detract from the main theme which is:

is Lazar full of BS? Even the top ufologists think he is- hence no money earned from his claims. Though I'm pretty sure he tried going by what I've read..

Can I prove this? Or more to the point: can I be bothered to!? ===== well it's all there if someone WANTS to find it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Golden Duck
On 23/12/2018 at 11:04 PM, Nnicolette said:

... Are you even aware of what anti-gravity properties consist of?

Are you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dejarma
9 minutes ago, OverSword said:

BS. People, even you I believe, ask me where I got a piece of information I posted, I tell them where, where to look or provide a link. This guy made several claims about this subject which I have not heard but refuses to make any effort to substantiate them. Nice try.

i said i'm done== i should have been more specific= i meant i'm done with you! i'll ask you not to reply to me on this subject again... i'd appreciate it. thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OverSword

@DejarmaI’m sorry, did I ever initiate dialogue with you? No. You did with me. Sorry if it didn’t go your way. You can put me on ignore if you want, but don’t try to tell me what, who or how to respond to people on this forum, not even yourself. There are already rules Set by Saru and I’m well within them.

Edited by OverSword

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OverSword
10 minutes ago, Dejarma said:

Even the top ufologists think he is

The WHAT???????  :lol: I doubt I’ll be able to resist now.

Spoiler

 

 

Edited by OverSword

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Golden Duck
On 24/12/2018 at 7:03 PM, Noteverythingisaconspiracy said:

Can anyone translate gostar ? :huh:

Maybe...

latest?cb=20160409130733

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dejarma
3 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

Maybe...

latest?cb=20160409130733

who could be bothered to try? futile/ pointless/ boring

just let these people boil in their own fantasy juice;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist

The simple fact is that Lazar appears to have held a lower paid job at a site where he did not have to have a clearance since he might not have had to enter a room requiring clearance or could have entered such rooms after any sensitive had been removed from sight.

Anything that can be checked shows Lazar is not truthful from his  background to the material he supposedly witnessed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist
On 11/27/2018 at 2:53 PM, Scudbuster said:

Looking forward to it. And here hopefully soon the brilliance and determination of T Townsend Brown will become much more widely known.

Brown was simply wrong. He did not observe anything special. He was unable to accept that,

Lazar on the other hand didn't observe anything. He simply was unable to make any guesses that stood the test of time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist
15 hours ago, Scudbuster said:

Oh, that's so, so, spot on.....uh huh.  Well, the military thought enough of his work it all went "deep black" around 1960 or thereabouts.....so funny that happened.  

And MRI units have about as much to do with anti gravity as my kitchen microwave does. 

Oh please support this story.

I agree that MRI units, btw that is Tesla today, has nothing to do with anti-gravity. Too bad Brown was so far out of his depth he couldn't see that.

As I pointed out in another thread, a pane has been built that flies with no moving parts doing what Brown was doing. Too bad your hero was so incompetent he could not understand what he was doing.

http://news.mit.edu/2018/first-ionic-wind-plane-no-moving-parts-1121

Quote

Now MIT engineers have built and flown the first-ever plane with no moving parts. Instead of propellers or turbines, the light aircraft is powered by an “ionic wind” — a silent but mighty flow of ions that is produced aboard the plane, and that generates enough thrust to propel the plane over a sustained, steady flight.

So sad you can't figure out that Brown was a failure with his idea of anti-gravity.

All Brown did was repeat a well known phenomenon and not understand that is all he did.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Trelane
11 hours ago, OverSword said:

No you just make unsubstantiated claims. You say the stubs were debunked? Prove it. There is zero reason for me to prove your statement for you. You said it, back it up or you’re no better than people that say aliens visit us. Weak.

You can huff and you can puff all you like. The house made of bricks contains the truth and you won't be able to knock it down. Not even with large quantities of element 115. This has been a closed topic for decades and yet there are believers (like yourself) that insist he's legitimate. I've observed many of your posts here and in other threads. Your baiting for arguments sake is totally unnecessary and calling me "weak" is also unnecessary. I sincerely believe that no matter what links I or any others provide, you will just carry on blathering about the links, their credibility and the curious (not so much though) case of one Robert Lazar. I provided my opinion with no intent of us arguing over opinions. Yes, opinion, that's all and I needed no reason to defend it to a disrespectful instigator. I feel absolutely no inclination to provide that which is easily accessible only to fuel further arguments with you. However, I am a respectful person and will out of respect to the forum rules indulge you.

https://www.news24.com/MyNews24/Debunking-UFO-Expert-Bob-Lazar-Part-1-20120825 ; please note at the end of the article where Lazar has shut down his website, pretty curious for a fellow attempting to go on press junkets to promote the "documentary". 

https://science.howstuffworks.com/space/aliens-ufos/bob-lazar.htm ; "In 1990 he was arrested for his involvement with the operation of a Nevada brothel" I'm fairly certain it was this nugget of info that shut down his ability to fully cash in at the time.

http://www.stantonfriedman.com/index.php?ptp=articles&fdt=2011.01.07 ; curious that a physicist such as Friedman would take exception with Lazar since they occupy the same 'battle space". However, even he sees through the ridiculousness of the various claims.

https://www.quora.com/Is-there-any-credible-science-within-Bob-Lazars-claims ; again curious that a MUFON contributor would completely rebuke any claims by Lazar as they could only help the pro-alien contact side of the argument. They side with Stanton Friedman's analysis and research into Lazar's background and claims.

https://www.livescience.com/23514-area-51.html ; added as a courtesy.

 

So if I may, what links can you provide that support his claims and the information regarding his background? Mind you, I don't need YouTube videos of Bob making the claims or anything written by him specifically. I need to know what other parties (preferably not George Knapp) can validate any of this fantasy. If you are unable or unwilling that is fine, I don't require an answer otherwise. I simply came on to state my opinions on the matter. Not to engage in a protracted debate about this foolishness. Thank you for your time.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OverSword
1 hour ago, Trelane said:

You can huff and you can puff all you like. The house made of bricks contains the truth and you won't be able to knock it down. Not even with large quantities of element 115. This has been a closed topic for decades and yet there are believers (like yourself) that insist he's legitimate. I've observed many of your posts here and in other threads. Your baiting for arguments sake is totally unnecessary and calling me "weak" is also unnecessary. I sincerely believe that no matter what links I or any others provide, you will just carry on blathering about the links, their credibility and the curious (not so much though) case of one Robert Lazar. I provided my opinion with no intent of us arguing over opinions. Yes, opinion, that's all and I needed no reason to defend it to a disrespectful instigator. I feel absolutely no inclination to provide that which is easily accessible only to fuel further arguments with you. However, I am a respectful person and will out of respect to the forum rules indulge you.

https://www.news24.com/MyNews24/Debunking-UFO-Expert-Bob-Lazar-Part-1-20120825 ; please note at the end of the article where Lazar has shut down his website, pretty curious for a fellow attempting to go on press junkets to promote the "documentary". 

https://science.howstuffworks.com/space/aliens-ufos/bob-lazar.htm ; "In 1990 he was arrested for his involvement with the operation of a Nevada brothel" I'm fairly certain it was this nugget of info that shut down his ability to fully cash in at the time.

http://www.stantonfriedman.com/index.php?ptp=articles&fdt=2011.01.07 ; curious that a physicist such as Friedman would take exception with Lazar since they occupy the same 'battle space". However, even he sees through the ridiculousness of the various claims.

https://www.quora.com/Is-there-any-credible-science-within-Bob-Lazars-claims ; again curious that a MUFON contributor would completely rebuke any claims by Lazar as they could only help the pro-alien contact side of the argument. They side with Stanton Friedman's analysis and research into Lazar's background and claims.

https://www.livescience.com/23514-area-51.html ; added as a courtesy.

 

So if I may, what links can you provide that support his claims and the information regarding his background? Mind you, I don't need YouTube videos of Bob making the claims or anything written by him specifically. I need to know what other parties (preferably not George Knapp) can validate any of this fantasy. If you are unable or unwilling that is fine, I don't require an answer otherwise. I simply came on to state my opinions on the matter. Not to engage in a protracted debate about this foolishness. Thank you for your time.

(to the bolded) That's the thing though, see.  I don't support Bob Lazar's claims.  You and a couple of others have mis-characterized me.  I'm not a believer as you have slandered me above.  If you go through this thread and look at my posts all I've ever said is that I find this story interesting for various reasons.  If you go even further and examine other threads in the UFO/Alien section you'll see I don't believe aliens have or ever will visit us on this planet.  People got confused because I listen to a podcast in which the maker of the new documentary is interviewed.  When people asked how come this or why that I would answer, "The dude in the podcast said blah blah blah" .  You may find people asking why I find it interesting and me saying there is the whole thing with the pay stubs (which you may have cleared up) or the fact that nobody had ever heard of Area 51 before Lazar outed it, but that's about the extent of any level of support I have for Lazar.  I don't watch things about ghosts or UFO's either but if I ever see this on netflix or redbox I think I will because the podcast interview was interesting.

Edited by OverSword
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Scudbuster
10 hours ago, stereologist said:

Oh please support this story.

I agree that MRI units, btw that is Tesla today, has nothing to do with anti-gravity. Too bad Brown was so far out of his depth he couldn't see that.

As I pointed out in another thread, a pane has been built that flies with no moving parts doing what Brown was doing. Too bad your hero was so incompetent he could not understand what he was doing.

http://news.mit.edu/2018/first-ionic-wind-plane-no-moving-parts-1121

So sad you can't figure out that Brown was a failure with his idea of anti-gravity.

All Brown did was repeat a well known phenomenon and not understand that is all he did.

 
Well, I'll be nice, let's just say you are "under informed". 
 
I'll capsulize some things for you:
 
Skeptics had claimed that Brown's flying discs were propelled entirely by ion wind pressure and would lose their propulsive force if tested in a vacuum chamber where few air molecules would be present. However, tests in Paris in 1955/56 proved them wrong. Under the sponsorship 
at facilities made available by the Societe Nationale duAeronautiques du sud-Quest, Brown flew a pair of miniature saucer airfoils in a high vacuum of less than one billionth of an atmosphere. And not only did the discs propel themselves more efficiently, but also sped feaster, since, without ion leakage, they could be energized with even greater voltages. So much for the myth that it's only "ion propulsion". Oh, and bless the hearts of those Harvard kids, for they are only 60-70 years behind TT Brown and other pioneers of this era.
 
During the mid 50's, Brown staged two demonstrations of his discs for the military. On the 2nd demonstration, he achieved speeds upward of 200 miles per hour. Other scientists and some press was there, including reporters from the Swiss aeronautical magazine Interavia. Up until this time, this work was somewhat out in the open, and often reported on by various sources. Besides the Swiss magazine, various issues of "Aviation Week" had some tasty tidbits like  "anti gravitics work is likely to go to companies with the biggest electrical laboratories and facilities.  Another:  "It is also apparent that anti gravitics, like other advanced sciences, will be initially sponsored for its weapons capabilities". So already the significance of this technology was raising eyebrows within the infamous "military industrial complex". 
 
 
Even the Dept of Defense issued a statement,  on October 15, 1955 - then Sec of the Air Force Donald A. Quarles stated at the time: 
 
    "We are now entering a period of aviation technology in which aircraft of unusual design configuration and flight characteristics will begin to appear, the Air Force and other armed services have under development several vertical rising, high performance aircraft...vertical aircraft capable of transition to supersonic horizontal flight will be a new phenomenon in our skies, and under certain conditions, could give the illusion of the so called flying saucers." It was interesting they put out video of the "avro car" in the late 50's as a cover story for the real research and technology going on.
 

However, somewhere after this time, the lid slammed shut and these various programs went into the "deep black". Obviously, the incredible potential of this technology had become very apparent to our political and military leaders. 

 
Brown was awarded a number of patents during this time. This may or may not be a full listing. He also teamed with Agnew Bahnson Jr on several of them: 
 
 
         
 
France 76,209 E Electrokinetic Apparatuses and Methods T. T. Brown 05/09/59
  1,207,509 Electrokinetic Apparatuses and Methods T. T. Brown 09/29/61
  1,207,519 Electrokinetic Methods T. T. Brown 02/17/60
         
 
Great Britain 300,311 Method of Producing Force or Motion T. T. Brown 11/15/28
         
 
U.S.A. 1,974,483 Electrostatic Motor T. T. Brown 09/25/34
  2,207,576 Method and Apparatus for Removing Suspended Matter from Gases T. T. Brown 03/11/47
  2,417,347 Vibration Damper T. T. Brown 03/11/47
         
  3,187,206 Electrokinetic Apparatus T. T. Brown 06/01/65
  3,196,296 Electric Generator T. T. Brown 07/20/65
         
  3,296,491 Method and Apparatus for Producing Ions and Electrically-Charged Aerosols T. T. Brown 01/03/67
  3,518,462 Fluid Flow Control System Guidance Technology, Inc. 06/30/70
 
Bahnson Laboratories CH 401,283 Electrical Thrust Producing Device Agnew H. Bahnson, Jr. 03/06/63
  GB 920,498 Electrical Thrust Producing Device Agnew H. Bahnson, Jr. 03/06/63
  US 2,958,790 Electrical Thrust Producing Device Agnew H. Bahnson, Jr. 11/01/60
  US 3,227,901 Electrical Thrust Producing Device Agnew H. Bahnson, Jr. 01/04/66
  US 4,339,782 Supersonic Jet Ionizer The Bahnson Co. 7/13/82
 
 
         
 
For more info, I would advise you consult the books written by PH.D Dr Tom Valone, Dr. Rolf Schaffranke and PH.D Dr Paul LaViolette on Ether Technology, Anti Gravitics,  and the overall history (at least what is publicly known) on anti gravity research. 
 
 
 
Obviously,  Lockheed's Ben Rich would have never have made these statements unless something highly advanced had not been occurring over the past 50+ years: 
 
Talking with Jim Goodall:  "Jim, we have things out in the desert that are fifty years beyond what you can comprehend. They have about forty-five hundred people at the Lockheed Skunk works. What have they been doing for the last eighteen or twenty years? They’re building something.” 

“There is an error in the equations, and we have figured it out, and now know how to travel to the stars, and it won’t take a lifetime to do it” (source: UCLA School of Engineering Alumni speech 3/23/93)

It is time to end all secrecy on this, as it no longer poses a national security threat, and make the technology available for use in the private sector”. (source: UCLA School of Engineering Alumni speech 3/23/93)“I wish I could tell you about the projects we are currently working on. They are both fascinating and fantastic. They call for technologies once only dreamed of by science fiction writers”. (source: AIAA lecture Atlanta, Ga. September 7-9 1988)

“I wish I could tell you about the projects we are currently working on. They are both fascinating and fantastic. They call for technologies once only dreamed of by science fiction writers”. (source: AIAA lecture Atlanta, Ga. September 7-9 1988)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Leo Krupe
29 minutes ago, Scudbuster said:

However, somewhere after this time, the lid slammed shut and these various programs went into the "deep black". Obviously, the incredible potential of this technology had become very apparent to our political and military leaders.

 

That's all well and good (I'm not the expert others are), but it seems to me that if the "incredible potential" of this technology had been achieved, we wouldn't still be using conventional propulsion systems. Ref.: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II#Specifications_(F-35A)

Quote

Now that's pretty radical compared to the technology of 1955, but it doesn't come close to what you're implying. Of course, you could argue "But it's still in deep black projects!" I would hope you wouldn't, because there's no way to defend that.

The fact of the matter is we're still using old fashioned chemical fuels for planes and rockets. You'd bet your bottom dollar that if anti-grav worked over 60 years ago, it would've made its way to the private world, and airliners would be using it as spin-off technology in some form. Since they haven't, well, there you go.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Scudbuster
25 minutes ago, Leo Krupe said:

That's all well and good (I'm not the expert others are), but it seems to me that if the "incredible potential" of this technology had been achieved, we wouldn't still be using conventional propulsion systems. Ref.: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II#Specifications_(F-35A)

Now that's pretty radical compared to the technology of 1955, but it doesn't come close to what you're implying. Of course, you could argue "But it's still in deep black projects!" I would hope you wouldn't, because there's no way to defend that.

The fact of the matter is we're still using old fashioned chemical fuels for planes and rockets. You'd bet your bottom dollar that if anti-grav worked over 60 years ago, it would've made its way to the private world, and airliners would be using it as spin-off technology in some form. Since they haven't, well, there you go.

Oh, they want to keep it under wraps for the obvious technical edge from a military standpoint, you sure as hell don't want your adversaries acquiring propulsion technology like this.  As Ben Rich said, this stuff is so deeply hidden it would take an act of god to get it out for private usage.  

They are using it already in the B2 bomber - this was reported in Aviation Week and Space Technology magazine way back in 1992. Their source was a group of scientists/engineers who were formerly associated with various black projects. Apparently the craft itself acts like a dielectric with the positive electrical charges applied to the leading wing edges and the negative charges to to the rear. I can only imagine what happened to those people....40 years in Leavenworth perhaps. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rlyeh
On ‎9‎/‎12‎/‎2018 at 9:02 AM, Scudbuster said:
So, let's have a little exercise....and go back 55-60 years and think "then" and "now".  
  • Computers then - filled an entire room...now they are portable, and very powerful. 
  • Portable phones - didn't exist, now everyone has them in their pockets
  • TV's - big, bulky, low res Black and white - now thin High Def that hang on your wall.
  • Medical - medical diagnostics was limited and primarily available only in large hospitals, now decentralized and remote as needed.
  • GPS didn't exist, now in your car and on your phone, directing airplanes and missiles with it and tracking drones.
  • Lasers- in their infancy, now they do all kinds of functions.
  • Rockets - chemical then, and chemical now.  

       Ah....what?? It was chemical then.........and chemical now..??  I don't think so.

Hold on, so by your brilliant reasoning if computers used electricity back in the 50s they shouldn't be using it now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Scudbuster
6 hours ago, Rlyeh said:

Hold on, so by your brilliant reasoning if computers used electricity back in the 50s they shouldn't be using it now?

I'm not at all sure how you can draw that conclusion from what I wrote earlier.

Computers 50-60 years ago were huge - think ENIAC for instance.

Todays are vastly smaller and far more powerful, but an energy source was need back then - electricity - and it's needed now, but fortunately, their efficiency factors are way up, so they require far, far, less power to operate. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dejarma
On 27/12/2018 at 11:41 PM, Scudbuster said:

Oh, they want to keep it under wraps for the obvious technical edge from a military standpoint, you sure as hell don't want your adversaries acquiring propulsion technology like this.

they're not keeping it under wraps because 'you' know about, apparently- so where's the edge as far as adversaries are concerned?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rlyeh
12 hours ago, Scudbuster said:

I'm not at all sure how you can draw that conclusion from what I wrote earlier. 

Read what I quoted, it's not that hard.

You don't think rockets should still use chemicals but you don't object computers still using electricity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist
21 hours ago, Scudbuster said:
 
Well, I'll be nice, let's just say you are "under informed". 
 
I'll capsulize some things for you:
 
Skeptics had claimed that Brown's flying discs were propelled entirely by ion wind pressure and would lose their propulsive force if tested in a vacuum chamber where few air molecules would be present. However, tests in Paris in 1955/56 proved them wrong. Under the sponsorship 
at facilities made available by the Societe Nationale duAeronautiques du sud-Quest, Brown flew a pair of miniature saucer airfoils in a high vacuum of less than one billionth of an atmosphere. And not only did the discs propel themselves more efficiently, but also sped feaster, since, without ion leakage, they could be energized with even greater voltages. So much for the myth that it's only "ion propulsion". Oh, and bless the hearts of those Harvard kids, for they are only 60-70 years behind TT Brown and other pioneers of this era.
 
During the mid 50's, Brown staged two demonstrations of his discs for the military. On the 2nd demonstration, he achieved speeds upward of 200 miles per hour. Other scientists and some press was there, including reporters from the Swiss aeronautical magazine Interavia. Up until this time, this work was somewhat out in the open, and often reported on by various sources. Besides the Swiss magazine, various issues of "Aviation Week" had some tasty tidbits like  "anti gravitics work is likely to go to companies with the biggest electrical laboratories and facilities.  Another:  "It is also apparent that anti gravitics, like other advanced sciences, will be initially sponsored for its weapons capabilities". So already the significance of this technology was raising eyebrows within the infamous "military industrial complex". 
 
 
Even the Dept of Defense issued a statement,  on October 15, 1955 - then Sec of the Air Force Donald A. Quarles stated at the time: 
 
    "We are now entering a period of aviation technology in which aircraft of unusual design configuration and flight characteristics will begin to appear, the Air Force and other armed services have under development several vertical rising, high performance aircraft...vertical aircraft capable of transition to supersonic horizontal flight will be a new phenomenon in our skies, and under certain conditions, could give the illusion of the so called flying saucers." It was interesting they put out video of the "avro car" in the late 50's as a cover story for the real research and technology going on.
 

However, somewhere after this time, the lid slammed shut and these various programs went into the "deep black". Obviously, the incredible potential of this technology had become very apparent to our political and military leaders. 

 
Brown was awarded a number of patents during this time. This may or may not be a full listing. He also teamed with Agnew Bahnson Jr on several of them: 
 
 
         
 
France 76,209 E Electrokinetic Apparatuses and Methods T. T. Brown 05/09/59
  1,207,509 Electrokinetic Apparatuses and Methods T. T. Brown 09/29/61
  1,207,519 Electrokinetic Methods T. T. Brown 02/17/60
         
 
Great Britain 300,311 Method of Producing Force or Motion T. T. Brown 11/15/28
         
 
U.S.A. 1,974,483 Electrostatic Motor T. T. Brown 09/25/34
  2,207,576 Method and Apparatus for Removing Suspended Matter from Gases T. T. Brown 03/11/47
  2,417,347 Vibration Damper T. T. Brown 03/11/47
         
  3,187,206 Electrokinetic Apparatus T. T. Brown 06/01/65
  3,196,296 Electric Generator T. T. Brown 07/20/65
         
  3,296,491 Method and Apparatus for Producing Ions and Electrically-Charged Aerosols T. T. Brown 01/03/67
  3,518,462 Fluid Flow Control System Guidance Technology, Inc. 06/30/70
 
Bahnson Laboratories CH 401,283 Electrical Thrust Producing Device Agnew H. Bahnson, Jr. 03/06/63
  GB 920,498 Electrical Thrust Producing Device Agnew H. Bahnson, Jr. 03/06/63
  US 2,958,790 Electrical Thrust Producing Device Agnew H. Bahnson, Jr. 11/01/60
  US 3,227,901 Electrical Thrust Producing Device Agnew H. Bahnson, Jr. 01/04/66
  US 4,339,782 Supersonic Jet Ionizer The Bahnson Co. 7/13/82
 
 
         
 
For more info, I would advise you consult the books written by PH.D Dr Tom Valone, Dr. Rolf Schaffranke and PH.D Dr Paul LaViolette on Ether Technology, Anti Gravitics,  and the overall history (at least what is publicly known) on anti gravity research. 
 
 
 
Obviously,  Lockheed's Ben Rich would have never have made these statements unless something highly advanced had not been occurring over the past 50+ years: 
 
Talking with Jim Goodall:  "Jim, we have things out in the desert that are fifty years beyond what you can comprehend. They have about forty-five hundred people at the Lockheed Skunk works. What have they been doing for the last eighteen or twenty years? They’re building something.” 

“There is an error in the equations, and we have figured it out, and now know how to travel to the stars, and it won’t take a lifetime to do it” (source: UCLA School of Engineering Alumni speech 3/23/93)

It is time to end all secrecy on this, as it no longer poses a national security threat, and make the technology available for use in the private sector”. (source: UCLA School of Engineering Alumni speech 3/23/93)“I wish I could tell you about the projects we are currently working on. They are both fascinating and fantastic. They call for technologies once only dreamed of by science fiction writers”. (source: AIAA lecture Atlanta, Ga. September 7-9 1988)

“I wish I could tell you about the projects we are currently working on. They are both fascinating and fantastic. They call for technologies once only dreamed of by science fiction writers”. (source: AIAA lecture Atlanta, Ga. September 7-9 1988)

You seem to be easily tricked.

There are plenty of stories of lying in a vacuum, but those appear to be all hoaxes. Brown never demonstrated flight in a vacuum.

The number of people legitimately working on an understanding of a unified theory of physics and the elusive one has been a theory incorporating gravity. Plenty o people have worked on the problem and none have seen anything like Brown's fantasy. Brown's problem is that he imagined he had developed some sort of anti-gravity system using electronic devices and could not fix his misconception. That's not so strange. There are all sorts of people thinking they have come up with unique medical devices, batteries, engines, etc. that i n fact do not work as claimed.

I do see lots of pseudoscience sites making dubious claims. That is what they do. They post and repost all sorts of fake stories. People love to suggest that Berlitz, a well known author who has fictionalized many issues, is a good source of information. He isn't as we all can see with his Bermuda triangle baloney and his Roswell baloney.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dejarma
11 minutes ago, stereologist said:

You seem to be easily tricked.

There are plenty of stories of lying in a vacuum, but those appear to be all hoaxes. Brown never demonstrated flight in a vacuum.

The number of people legitimately working on an understanding of a unified theory of physics and the elusive one has been a theory incorporating gravity. Plenty o people have worked on the problem and none have seen anything like Brown's fantasy. Brown's problem is that he imagined he had developed some sort of anti-gravity system using electronic devices and could not fix his misconception. That's not so strange. There are all sorts of people thinking they have come up with unique medical devices, batteries, engines, etc. that i n fact do not work as claimed.

I do see lots of pseudoscience sites making dubious claims. That is what they do. They post and repost all sorts of fake stories. People love to suggest that Berlitz, a well known author who has fictionalized many issues, is a good source of information. He isn't as we all can see with his Bermuda triangle baloney and his Roswell baloney.

 

60 years on this planet & i still can't work out why 'some' (& it is only a few) enjoy swimming in BS! I honestly find it fascinating ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist

There are people out there building lifters. They do what people told brown - they work on ion wind, not antigravity.

https://www.wired.com/2003/08/pwr-antigravity/

Quote

When I call university physicists to ask how these things work, they bark with laughter at the idea that it's antigravity.

Quote

Over time, I discover that none of these much-vaunted flights in a vacuum are properly documented. In fact, the only written report documents a vacuum test that failed: R. L. Talley, a researcher who tested a Biefeld-Brown-style capacitor in 1990 for the Air Force, found no thrust in a vacuum. But that study wasn't peer-reviewed either.

Despite Brown getting it wrong and never being able to produce a viable commercial product his work still show that it might be possible to use his technique to produce flight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gostar
On 12/27/2018 at 5:26 PM, Scudbuster said:

Even the Dept of Defense issued a statement,  on October 15, 1955 - then Sec of the Air Force Donald A. Quarles stated at the time:

 

However, somewhere after this time, the lid slammed shut and these various programs went into the "deep black". Obviously, the incredible potential of this technology had become very apparent to our political and military leaders.

Brown was awarded a number of patents during this time. This may or may not be a full listing. He also teamed with Agnew Bahnson Jr on several of them: 
 
 
         
 
France 76,209 E Electrokinetic Apparatuses and Methods T. T. Brown 05/09/59
  1,207,509 Electrokinetic Apparatuses and Methods T. T. Brown 09/29/61
  1,207,519 Electrokinetic Methods T. T. Brown 02/17/60
         
 
Great Britain 300,311 Method of Producing Force or Motion T. T. Brown 11/15/28
         
 
U.S.A. 1,974,483 Electrostatic Motor T. T. Brown 09/25/34
  2,207,576 Method and Apparatus for Removing Suspended Matter from Gases T. T. Brown 03/11/47
  2,417,347 Vibration Damper T. T. Brown 03/11/47
         
  3,187,206 Electrokinetic Apparatus T. T. Brown 06/01/65
  3,196,296 Electric Generator T. T. Brown 07/20/65
         
  3,296,491 Method and Apparatus for Producing Ions and Electrically-Charged Aerosols T. T. Brown 01/03/67
  3,518,462 Fluid Flow Control System Guidance Technology, Inc. 06/30/70
 
         
         
         
         
         
 
         
 

NASA Astronaut Nick Hague Set for New Space Station Mission After Abort

NASA astronaut Nick Hague, who was forced to abort his recent mission to the International Space Station, is scheduled to launch again Feb. 28, 2019, from the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan.

Hague will launch with Alexey Ovchinin of the Russian space agency Roscosmos, who was his commander and crewmate on the aborted mission in October, and NASA astronaut Christina Hammock Koch aboard the Russian Soyuz MS-12 spacecraft. The trio will join the station’s Expedition 59 crew and return to Earth in October 2019 as members of Expedition 60. Hague and Koch will serve as flight engineers for Expeditions 59 and 60. Ovchinin will serve as a flight engineer on Expedition 59 and the commander of Expedition 60.

Hague will be available for media interviews at 7 a.m. EST Friday, Dec. 7. To schedule an interview, media must contact Megan Sumner at megan.c.sumner@nasa.gov or 281-483-5111 by noon Thursday, Dec. 4.

nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-astronaut-nick-hague-set-for-new-space-station-mission-after-abort

...................

"T.T. Brown ..................... is connected to the "Challenger Disaster"?  And, 2019 is the year of a trajedy and also discovery?

The disaster cost the lives of the seven astronauts on board -- Gregory Jarvis, Judith Resnik, Dick Scobee, Ronald McNair, Mike J. Smith, Ellison Onizuka, and special guest Sharon Christa McAuliffe -- and one NASA engineer named Elmer Thomas who died of a heart attack.  

http://info.advanced-emc.com/blog/famous-seal-disasters-in-history-space-shuttle-challenger

("Thomas Dunn" the Angel is not used, the names we see are, Originally in this case "T.T. Brown" as angel reference, and then "Elmer Thomas", or "Angel Thomas")

...................

...................

("Thomas Dunn" recently poked a hole in the international space station, this kind of event happened before the Challenger Disaster, but i can't be sure on the details)

...................

...................

(We discussed recently, "Thomas Dunn", rediscovery at the time of "President Donald Trump", and it is very significant for Donald Trump to get what he wants, because, bad things happen, when one nation under god is impeded on, and I think apart of this, conflict, also parallels the challenger disaster, but we can't be sure, until we see, as to what is necessary)

Edited by gostar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.