From: owner-skunk-works-digest@eagle.netwrx1.com (skunk-works-digest)
To: skunk-works-digest@eagle.netwrx1.com
Subject: skunk-works-digest V6 #60
Reply-To: skunk-works@netwrx1.com
Sender: owner-skunk-works-digest@eagle.netwrx1.com
Errors-To: owner-skunk-works-digest@eagle.netwrx1.com
Precedence: bulk


skunk-works-digest        Friday, June 27 1997        Volume 06 : Number 060



In this issue:

        Apollo Lifeboat
        re: BOOM!
        Re: X-38 tests
        Re: X-38 tests
        Re: X-38 tests
        Re: X-38 tests
        Re: X-38 tests... getting a bit off-charter...
        [none]
        Re: <no subject>
        X-33 Homepage
        RE: <no subject>
        More B-2's?
        LO F-16s in WAPJ
        CSETI Congressional Briefing on TV tonight (Thursday)
        CSETI Congressional Briefing on TV tonight (Thursday)
        Re: CSETI Congressional Briefing on TV tonight (Thursday)
        Re: CSETI ...
        Veracity of Skunky Black Triangle?
        Apology
        Re: CSETI Congressional Briefing on TV tonight (Thursday)
        CSETI Congressional Briefing
        Re: CSETI Congressional Briefing

See the end of the digest for information on subscribing to the
skunk-works or skunk-works-digest mailing lists and on how to
retrieve back issues.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 08:39:01 -0500 (EST)
From: ROTRAMELJE%AM4@mr.nawcad.navy.mil
Subject: Apollo Lifeboat

If NASA didn't have enough common sense to retain the drawings for the Saturn 
V, isn't it wishful thinking to believe would they keep information on a 
'family model' Apollo design proposal? Never underestimate the stupidity of a 
bureaucracy!

Jim Rotramel

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 23 Jun 97 9:35:44 nA
From: ahanley@usace.mil
Subject: re: BOOM!

Earl,

	If it was the SR, it could easily have been supersonic (35K is not 
particularly low for that, it's just not that common to hear sonic booms of US 
land anymore, that's why it makes the news), although it wouldn't be anywhhere 
near its cruise speed.




                                          Art Hanley

                             "My employer has nothing to do with this"
                                     (keeps the lawyers happy)

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 02:32:29 -0700
From: Dan Zinngrabe <quellish@macconnect.com>
Subject: Re: X-38 tests

>Regarding capsules in general, the reason why Soyuz capsules are not to be
>used any more than is absolutely necessary is that they only fit
>small-toaverage people.  How crowded would a 6-seat Apollo get?  Also,
>ballistic capsules enter at very high-g - not a good idea for a lifeboat,
>where you might have injured people.
>
>
>What has decided the issue was the lifeboat function: a capsule must splash
>down (OK, the Russians land theirs on dry land... with a hell of a bump)
>near a support ship.  A lifting body has greater cross-range capability and
>can select a wider variety of landing sites, therefore it need not linger in
>orbit for long.  This also reduces on-board equipment costs - everthing can
>be designed for short, rather than long endurance in free flight.  Also good
>for injured people who need a doctor ASAP.
>

And these are the exact reasons that a lifting bodie was chosen- after
much, much debate- over a simpler capsule. X-38 is designed to use
off-the-shelf, proven parts that are in production as well as using a lot
of older R&D from the lifting bodie program, various NASA/industry studies,
and the HL-20. Cost has been cut in every place it can without sacrificing
mission capability. It's not intended as a "growth system"- they don't want
to expand the design to make it "shuttle-x" or what have you- they don't
EVER want to be in a situation where they have to use it- but like the man
says, i'd rather have one and not need it than need it and not have it.

>All of this can be classified as "AFAIK," so take a few grains of salt.
ummm.... what compartment is AFAIK? Umbra?
LOL
Dan


http://www.macconnect.com/~quellish
Black Dawn

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 13:00:21 +1200
From: Brett Davidson <Brett.Davidson@vuw.ac.nz>
Subject: Re: X-38 tests

>>All of this can be classified as "AFAIK," so take a few grains of salt.

>ummm.... what compartment is AFAIK? Umbra?
>LOL
>Dan

Well, it's pronounced "a fake" in that I'm not a real designer or architect,
I only play one on television, I mean in the classroom.  And without tenure,
at that.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 13:41:42 +1200
From: Brett Davidson <Brett.Davidson@vuw.ac.nz>
Subject: Re: X-38 tests

At 06:06 AM 23/06/97 GMT, you wrote:
  My point is that as a lifeboat 
>alone, I don't think the development of the X-38 can be justified.  In
combination 
>with another role or two, that's a different story, providing it would be 
>reusable.  

>> All of this can be classified as "AFAIK," so take a few grains of salt.
 
>     Ditto.  
>
>                                   Art "Look Out Below!" Hanley
>

Relying on my memory again, it is indeed meant to be reuseable; and
upgrading it as a three-seater minishuttle for ESA is spoken of hopefully -
though finding out what ESA will do is like herding cats at this stage.  The
British Conservative government was very hostile to investment in manned
spaceflight (in the form of Hermes-Ariane 5), but after the election, that
attitude may or may not change.  As for France (which has also seen a defeat
for a spending-slashing administration) and Germany and Italy etc, who
knows?  The option might be very attractive.  

NASA does feel that it has to prove that it can do something like this
within budget and with more sex appeal than a ballistic capsule.  Internal
(NASA and the USA) politics would almost certainly have played a part, I guess.

To digress a bit, I can imagine a space infrastructure a little akin to some
of the plans of the 60s and 70s coming together by default: space station
for orbital stays, manned taxis to and from orbit based on the ESA-X-38, and
the VentureStar to do the heavy lifting - the expense of man-rating it could
be thus avoided.

BTW, the space staion site has recently been upgraded
(http://station.nasa.gov/) and features renderings of the station with the
crew return vehicle docked.  You have to look hard, however, and I've found
precious few resources on the CRV programme overall.  Anyone else found
anything, apart from the odd image file?

http://hungerford.chch.cri.nz/k/st.html has been uprated: the X-33 section
has images of the Aeroballistic rocket patent application (I can't find it
on the official patent site, however) and clearly displays cockpit windows!

Wishful thinking on my part - I would very much like to see the X-38 work,
of course.

- --Brett "Splat!" Davidson

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 24 Jun 97 05:30:14 GMT
From: betnal@ns.net
Subject: Re: X-38 tests

> 
> Relying on my memory again, it is indeed meant to be reuseable; and
> upgrading it as a three-seater minishuttle for ESA is spoken of hopefully -
> though finding out what ESA will do is like herding cats at this stage.  The
> 

     Now that tends to point towards my second explanation:  What they really want 
to do is something larger, and using the lifeboat as a main reason to develop it 
helps gets the funding.  If it's hard to justify an X-38's costs versus a 3 or 6 
seat Apollo as a lifeboat, it's even harder to justify the costs of developing a 
REUSABLE vehicle solely as a lifeboat. 


> NASA does feel that it has to prove that it can do something like this
> within budget and with more sex appeal than a ballistic capsule.  Internal
> (NASA and the USA) politics would almost certainly have played a part, I guess.
> 

     Actually, Apollo was not purely ballistic, it did have the ability to "fly" 
to a limited extent (not as much as a lifting body, natch) prior to chute 
deployment, but that capability was never needed in the program.  Of course 
politics would play a part, doesn't it always?  

> To digress a bit, I can imagine a space infrastructure a little akin to some
> of the plans of the 60s and 70s coming together by default: space station
> for orbital stays, manned taxis to and from orbit based on the ESA-X-38, and
> the VentureStar to do the heavy lifting - the expense of man-rating it could
> be thus avoided.
> 

     I too believe that we should go back to space.  This time, we should have a 
definite plan, though (there really wasn't one beyond the initial series of moon 
landings).  Also, I hope we use more off the shelf or "sufficient tech" instead of 
"highest tech" to do it.  We need to set as our objective the actual 
accomplishment of goals as opposed to having the largest program to get there.  
The fact that NASA awarded one of the Bantam-X program contracts to Pioneer 
Rocketplane (assuming it wasn't just awarded as a distractor or to get government 
funding in at the start in order to assert control later on) is to me extremely 
encouraging.  

     I think we may have strayed a bit away from the charter of this list, at this 
point, so I'll try and shut up (not an easy task for me!).  

                                   Art 

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 18:20:07 +1200
From: Brett Davidson <Brett.Davidson@vuw.ac.nz>
Subject: Re: X-38 tests... getting a bit off-charter...

At 05:30 AM 24/06/97 GMT, you wrote:

>landings).  Also, I hope we use more off the shelf or "sufficient tech"
instead >of "highest tech" to do it.  We need to set as our objective the
actual 
>accomplishment of goals as opposed to having the largest program to get there.
>
>     I think we may have strayed a bit away from the charter of this list,
at this 
>point, so I'll try and shut up (not an easy task for me!).  
>
>                                   Art 

OK I'm going to drift a bit more off charter and leave it at that, fun
though it has been.  This is really irrelevant: has anyone read Stephen
Baxter's novel, "Voyage"?  It (quite convincingly - to me) depicts an
alternate history/scenario in which Saturn/Apollo hardware is used to
construct a space-based infrastructure and go to Mars.  Rhetorical question
- - this isn't a books list.

The skunky reference there, I guess, could be the plot thread in which a
Skunk Works type outfit gets the contract for the Mars lander in a way
similar to how the Skunk Works won the stealth fighter competition.

- --Brett

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 24 Jun 97 14:15:00 PDT
From: Stephen Hallahan <SHallahan@sni.co.uk>
Subject: [none]

mail.btinternet.com  

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 10:00:57 -0400
From: gregweigold@pmsc.com (GREG WEIGOLD)
Subject: Re: <no subject>

     Huh?  Did I miss a new thread?         GW


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: <no subject>
Author:  Stephen Hallahan <SHallahan@sni.co.uk> at INTERNET
Date:    6/24/97 2:15 PM


     
mail.btinternet.com  

------------------------------

Date: 24 Jun 97 09:18:48 EDT
From: CULLY@svr81trw.kee.aetc.af.mil (CULLY, George Mr)
Subject: X-33 Homepage

The NASA X-33 Historian, Dr Andrew J. Butrica, has set up a website for

X-33 Program info, including bibliography listings.  Frequent additions 
are

promised.  The address is:



   <http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/x-33/home.htm>



Geo. Cully

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 24 Jun 97 15:35:00 PDT
From: Stephen Hallahan <SHallahan@sni.co.uk>
Subject: RE: <no subject>

??? I'm just subscribing...

 -----Original Message-----
From: gregweigold@pmsc.com [SMTP:gregweigold@pmsc.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 1997 3:01 PM
To: Stephen Hallahan; 'skunk-works@pmihwy.com'
Subject: Re: <no subject>

     Huh?  Did I miss a new thread?         GW


______________________________ Reply Separator   
_________________________________
Subject: <no subject>
Author:  Stephen Hallahan <SHallahan@sni.co.uk> at INTERNET
Date:    6/24/97 2:15 PM


       

mail.btinternet.com    

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 08:11:05 -0500
From: Tom Robison <tcrobi@most.fw.hac.com>
Subject: More B-2's?

From AirJet Airline News Daily...

* Late Monday, the House of Representatives agreed to authorize
  purchase of additional radar-evading B-2 stealth bombers over
  objections of the Clinton administration. On a vote of 216-209
  it rejected an amendment to the 1998 defense authorization bill
  which would have eliminated $331 million for advance
  procurement of the NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORP B-2 planes once the
  current production of 21 planes is completed. (Reuters 08:59 PM
  ET 06/23/97) For the full text story, see
  http://www.merc.com/stories/cgi/story.cgi?id=3595015-b88


Tom Robison
tcrobi@most.fw.hac.com
Hughes Defense Communications, Fort Wayne, IN

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 09:04:17 -0700
From: habu@why.net
Subject: LO F-16s in WAPJ

Either the list is extremely slow or my ISP is extremely flakey,
but I haven't seen any traffic in a few days, and very little
in the preceding weeks....so:

The latest World Air Power Journal (WAPJ Vol 29) has a couple of 
interesting photos of F-16s being tested at LMTAS in Ft Worth.

One photo shows LMTAS test airframe 83-1120 (an early F-16C) with
a new serpentine intake.  There is a prominent bulge on the underside
of the fuselage (kind of like the shock cones on an F-104) and the
intake is larger, lower, and has a scalloped leading edge.  The aircraft
appears to be landing, so the mod is flying.  Given the lead time of
the magazine and the appearance of the background vegetation, this 
shot is probably 3-6 months old.  I think I know who the photographer
was too... :)

The next photo shows an F-16C with "tail number" 00-ALC.  This airframe
is the testbed for the Low Observable Axisymmetric Nozzle (LOAN), an
F100-PW-100 with a thrust vectoring nozzle with sawtooth edges on the
'turkey feathers'.  The engine also incorporates a reduced IR signature.
I don't know if this is a flying airframe (given the SerNo), and the 
photo shows 00-ALC in full burner at night during ground runs.  This
looks like an internal LMTAS publicity photo.

There is also a photo of the sole EC-130V (with the E-2C radome) in
semi-USCG markings that was discussed a while back on the list...


	Greg Fieser

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 12:42:40 -0700
From: "A.J. Craddock" <webmaster@cseti.org>
Subject: CSETI Congressional Briefing on TV tonight (Thursday)

Tonight (Thurs, June 26) "Strange Universe" is re-running their April program with the segment on CSETI's Congressional Briefing in Washington DC about the UFO/ETI/ARV coverup.  The piece also features quotes from some of the Witnesses who testified.  Check local listings.  



Regards


Tony Craddock

Web Administrator				

CSETI  <bold>				      

</bold>http://www.cseti.org			     

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 12:42:40 -0700
From: "A.J. Craddock" <webmaster@cseti.org>
Subject: CSETI Congressional Briefing on TV tonight (Thursday)

Tonight (Thurs, June 26) "Strange Universe" is re-running their April program with the segment on CSETI's Congressional Briefing in Washington DC about the UFO/ETI/ARV coverup.  The piece also features quotes from some of the Witnesses who testified.  Check local listings.  



Regards


Tony Craddock

Web Administrator				

CSETI  <bold>				      

</bold>http://www.cseti.org			     

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 10:17:03 +1200
From: Brett Davidson <Brett.Davidson@vuw.ac.nz>
Subject: Re: CSETI Congressional Briefing on TV tonight (Thursday)

At 12:42 PM 26/06/97 -0700, you wrote:
>Tonight (Thurs, June 26) "Strange Universe" is re-running their April
program >with the segment on CSETI's Congressional Briefing in Washington DC
about the >UFO/ETI/ARV coverup.  The piece also features quotes from some of
the Witnesses >who testified.  Check local listings.  

I suppose that one of the advantages of living in New Zealand is that I'll
never run the risk of switching on my television and seeing this.  I must
confess that I have a great deal of difficulty comprehending American humour
sometimes.

May I suggest that an appropriate punishment for grossly off-charter
postings would be something along the lines of Alex's treatment in "A
Clockwork Orange": being strapped into a chair, with ones eyes held open,
being forced to watch "Aurora - Operation Intercept" ("Plan 9 From Outer
Space" would be too much fun)  or the Santilli film of the "alien disection"
while the scribblings of George Adamski are read out in a loud voice...

- --Brett

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 18:25:27 -0700
From: larry@ichips.intel.com
Subject: Re: CSETI ...

Brett writes:
>May I suggest that an appropriate punishment for grossly off-charter
>postings would be something along the lines of ...
>being forced to watch "Aurora - Operation Intercept" ("Plan 9 From Outer
>Space" would be too much fun)

I liked the Aurora taxi out of the hangar/takeoff/climbout scene
the best. Did you notice the Groom Lake patches on the Aurora
crewmen's shoulders? I especially liked how, during climbout, they
flicked the external runway lights off on the Aurora. Nice effect.
Also the instrument panel was interesting as it had instruments like
scramjet boost etc, or whatever.

Ready for gravity boost!  :)

>May I suggest that an appropriate punishment the Santilli film ...
>while the scribblings of George Adamski are read out in a loud voice...

No way! They probably believe that stuff!

No, make them listen to back issues of Skeptical Inquirer!!

Larry

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 02:13:23 -0700
From: phraesius@rfhsm.ac.uk (gilbert blythe)
Subject: Veracity of Skunky Black Triangle?

Can any list members comment as to the veracity of Rich Boyland's following
claims of an air force industry manufactured anti-gravity craft? Any
response much appreciated. For the sake of band-width, please respond privately.

Gil Blythe
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------


        While many in the UFO investigation community are understandably
excited about the recurrent overflights of Phoenix by a very large array
of lights forming a shallow V, and that videotape of that formation has
been shown on NBC network (and affiliates) news, I suggest that we proceed
cautiously in asserting that THIS particular phenomenon proves that we are
being visited by extraterrestrial civilizations.

        The V-formation of lights is ALSO entirely consistent with a
common array of lights on the large triangular antigravity craft
manufactured by one or more of the Lockheed-Martin, McDonnell-Douglas and
Northrop underground "black" aerospace factories in the
Lancaster/Palmdale-Helendale-Llano Triangle, in the desert near the north
Los Angeles County line. Similar descriptions of a V array of lights have
been reported when a U.S.-manufactured large black triangular craft flew
extremely slowly (like <15 mph) in the night sky over Lancaster and the
northwestern Antelope Valley. The lights were along its leading edge.

        The UFO Cover-Up organization is planning its own well-timed
disinformation-debunking strategies as we approach the 50th Anniversary of
the Roswell UFO/ETs retrieval, complete with Congressional UFO petitions
campaign co-leader Kent Jeffries turning/"being turned?" and about to
announce publicly that he does not believe a UFO crashed at Roswell, and
the Air Force Office of Disinformation (AFOSI) about to issue another
deceptive "report" on the Roswell crash as a misunderstood secret
experiment involving dummies.

        It certainly would not be beyond possibility for the UFO Cover-Up
organization to unveil the military's large triangular antigravity craft
around Independence Day, while simultaneously ridiculing "overcredulous"
UFO investigators for mistaking its Triangle's leading-edge lights for a
squadron of stationary UFOs over Phoenix. [Of course, the military won't
mention the ET source of their palagarized technology.] Such a coup would
set back genuine UFO reporting for a while, and back the media off from
accepting (genuine) UFO reports for a long time.

        What has been seen and reported over Phoenix may be genuine
UFO(s), or it may be copycat U.S. weapons-industry antigravity craft. The
prudent course for the UFO investigation community will be to afirm that
the silent, semi-stationary, levitating lighted objects over Phoenix are
not consistent with any publicly-known human technology, and merit
immediate investigation and public explanation by the government. Let's
put the burden of explanation back on the government. Let them either
demonstrate that antigravity technology is human or of the
extraterrestrials. The real question we should be asking is not so much
where those lights came from, but how come the military and FAA are
covering up, and shirking their responsibility to identify everything
flying in U.S. airspace, or admit that U.S. airspace is being occupied by
craft that the government can neither explain nor do anything about.

        By such a reasoned and "civic" approach, the UFO investigation
community takes the moral high ground, and leaves the government to either
do its duty or be exposed as shirking its duty.

        As ORTK so well states, the UFO Cover-Up will not be resolved so
much by scientific explanation, as by political action - demanding that
FAA and military officials provide answers, or admit that there are
"unknowns" in our skies, instead of ignoring the data.

                                        Richard Boylan, Ph.d.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 08:40:26 -0700
From: habu@why.net
Subject: Apology

I would like to apologize for all the bounced posts everyone received
 recently from my address.  I was out of town for a week or so and, upon
 returning, was surprised/disappointed in the lack of mail I received
 during my absence.  When I didn't see my posts to the list I contacted
 George, who kindly replied and informed me of the bounce problem.  I
 then received a post from my ISP describing a "problem with our upstream
 provider" two weeks prior.  I guess this translates into "we screwed up,
 you didn't get any of your mail, everyone else got a ton of bounce
 notices, and we're just now getting around to telling you about it..."

 I've been with this ISP for about two years, and (as far as I know) this
 is the first time this kind of problem has occurred.  I can assure you
 that the next time will also be the last.  Please feel free to send a
 flame or two (or more) to my ISP sysadmin at "why@why.net" - I certainly
 have done so... :)

 Again, sorry for the bounces.  George has kindly agreed to allow me to 
 re-sub as long as my ISP minds it's manners.

	Greg Fieser (will you take a check?)

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 10:17:51 -0700 (PDT)
From: dadams@netcom.com
Subject: Re: CSETI Congressional Briefing on TV tonight (Thursday)

> >Tonight (Thurs, June 26) "Strange Universe" is re-running their April
> >program >with the segment on CSETI's Congressional Briefing in Washington DC
> >about the >UFO/ETI/ARV coverup.

Yeech, what a freak show...

> I suppose that one of the advantages of living in New Zealand is that I'll
> never run the risk of switching on my television and seeing this.  I must
> confess that I have a great deal of difficulty comprehending American humour
> sometimes.

You're not the only one!  What I also can't quite fathom is how 
someone sees a listname like "skunk-works" and repeatedly interprets
it as meaning "new-age-wacko-lunacy-list".  Oh, well...!

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 14:32:21 -0700
From: "A.J. Craddock" <craddock@west.net>
Subject: CSETI Congressional Briefing

At 10:17 AM 6/27/97 -0700, dadams@netcom.com wrote:
>> >Tonight (Thurs, June 26) "Strange Universe" is re-running their April
>> >program >with the segment on CSETI's Congressional Briefing in
Washington DC
>> >about the >UFO/ETI/ARV coverup.
>
>Yeech, what a freak show...
>
>> I suppose that one of the advantages of living in New Zealand is that I'll
>> never run the risk of switching on my television and seeing this.  I must
>> confess that I have a great deal of difficulty comprehending American
humour
>> sometimes.
>
>You're not the only one!  What I also can't quite fathom is how 
>someone sees a listname like "skunk-works" and repeatedly interprets
>it as meaning "new-age-wacko-lunacy-list".  Oh, well...!
>

Now there's a conundrum!

General Shalikashvili, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, sends CSETI a
letter with his best wishes for the success of their Congressional
briefings, and his regrets at not being able to attend personally due to
foreign travel.

The proceedings are co-chaired by Apollo 14 astronaut Dr. Edgar Mitchell.

Two dozen Congressional offices send representatives, together with several
VIPs from the Executive Branch, the Pentagon, representatives of the Dutch
Embassy, the National Academy of Sciences, two State Governor's offices and
others.

Ben Rich's regretful comments about our capability to move among the stars
being irrevocably locked up in black projects are widely quoted.  A list of
facilities involved is presented (yes, skunk works is on there).

Footage of ARVs is shown, including one at Nellis.

Witness after witness tells of the extent of the ET phenomenon.  Two inches
of declassified documents supporting this are presented, together with
declassified audiotape. 

Numerous list members send thanks for being notified of the chance to learn
more about all this.

And some want to keep their heads firmly in the sand.

Is the Internet great or what?

Tony Craddock

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 12:43:40 +1200
From: Brett Davidson <Brett.Davidson@vuw.ac.nz>
Subject: Re: CSETI Congressional Briefing

At 02:32 PM 27/06/97 -0700, you wrote:

>General Shalikashvili, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, sends CSETI a
>letter with his best wishes for the success of their Congressional
>briefings, and his regrets at not being able to attend personally due to
>foreign travel.

Polite form letters are always sent out to participants in these sort of
events.  They mean no more than the "exclusive offers that no discerning
conoiseur would miss" that Reader's Digest and the Franklin Mint send out.

Various other luminaries' names are dropped.  I must admit that I am not
familiar with the detailed context of the hearing, but then I doubt that
you'd be able to tell me much about the details of constitutional monarchy
and mixed-member proportional representation.

I would assume that it is standand in a democracy that a fair hearing is
given to every loon, but as Anatole France said: "If forty million people
say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing."

>Ben Rich's regretful comments about our capability to move among the stars
>being irrevocably locked up in black projects are widely quoted. 

...and misrepresented.  Ad nauseum.  And he is conveniently dead so that he
can't clarify his intent.

>Footage of ARVs is shown, including one at Nellis.
>
>Witness after witness tells of the extent of the ET phenomenon.  Two inches
>of declassified documents supporting this are presented, together with
>declassified audiotape. 

I really don't want to get into a long and tedious discussion of perceptual
psychology, fraud and mass hysteria.  It will only turn into a flame war.
Lots of people saw angels, witches, demons etc etc etc. hundreds of years
ago.  I suggest Carl Sagan's "A Demon Haunted World" as an initial primer.
Try also, Elaine Showalter's "Hystories."

>Numerous list members send thanks for being notified of the chance to learn
>more about all this.

Whoopee.

Fine, but I perceive this as being an aerospace technology list, dealing
with the edges of the black world.  I am happy to see it stretched somewhat
into discussions of the X-38 and the odd bit of banter when nothing else is
happening, but this is not a cocktail party.

>And some want to keep their heads firmly in the sand.

That is an insult to my intelligence and my integrity.  I am personally
quite certain that there is extraterrestrial life, but I don't expect to be
contacted by a Europan jellyfish anytime soon.  What arouses my ire is the
Star-Trek vision of ETI, in which impossibly humanoid aliens, in a vast
universe billions of years old, just happen to be much like us, only a
little more advanced technologically.  It's like exploring the Amazon jungle
and finding a tribe, that entirely by coincidence, speak cockney rhyming
slang and have invented double-decker buses.  Genetically, we are more
closely related to oak trees than we can be to any alien.  I find the
possible vistas of life to be sublime and fascinating - I think that someone
else is suffering from a severe restriction of the imagination.

>Is the Internet great or what?

It is.  It allows specialist forums on a tremendous variety of topics.  This
one happens to be centred around the likely goings-on at the skunk-works and
related institutions.  There are plenty of other forums for ufos. I am
interested in the history of architecture, the history of alchemy and its
influence on the development of modern scientific method.  Out of courtesy,
I don't mention Memory Theatres, John Dee, Christopher Wren, Francis Bacon,
Decartes, Le Corbusier, or whoever here.

Thank god that there aren't any postmodernists here. 

Q: How many postmodernists does it take to change a light bulb?

A: Two. One to change the bulb, and the other to write a book about how the
crisis of representation in the old light bulb has lead to the new one
transgressing the boundaries and undermining the hegemonies of our present
corrupt patriarchal order.

Right, enough.  I apologise for going off charter explaining elementary
points that should be self-evident, and for coming near to losing my temper.
I am stating principles, I do not wish to begin a slanging match, and I will
say no more on this issue.

- --Brett

------------------------------

End of skunk-works-digest V6 #60
********************************

To subscribe to skunk-works-digest, send the command:

    subscribe skunk-works-digest

in the body of a message to "majordomo@netwrx1.com".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-skunk-works":

    subscribe skunk-works-digest local-skunk-works@your.domain.net

To unsubscribe, send mail to the same address, with the command:

        unsubscribe skunk-works-digest

in the body.

Administrative requests, problems, and other non-list mail can be sent
to either "skunk-works-digest-owner@netwrx1.com" or, if you don't like
to type a lot, "georgek@netwrx1.com".

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "skunk-works-digest"
in the commands above with "skunk-works".

Back issues are available for e-mail request by sending a message to
majordomo@netwrx1.com with no subject and a line containing "get
skunk-works-digest vNN.nMMM" (where "NN" is the volume number, and "MMM"
is the issue number). You can get a list of all available digests by
sending the one line command "index skunk-works-digest".

If you have any questions or problems please contact me at:

georgek@netwrx1.com

Thanks,

George R. Kasica