Experimentallraketen – ein Mittel zur... Logout | Themenbereiche | Suche
Moderatoren | Registrieren | Profil

Modellraketen Forum » Modellraketen Treff » Experimentallraketen – ein Mittel zur Erforschung von UFOs und anderen unbekannten Leuchterscheinungen? « Zurück Weiter »

Autor Beitrag
SeitenanfangVorheriger BeitragNächster BeitragSeitenende Link zu diesem Beitrag

Harald

Bewertung: -
Abstimmungen: 0 (Abstimmen!)

Veröffentlicht am Dienstag, 19. Februar 2002 - 14:46 Uhr:   Beitrag editierenBeitrag löschenSchnellansichtBeitrag drucken   Beitrag verschieben (Nur für Moderatoren)

vor etwas über einem Jahr trat ich mit dem norwegischen Modellraketenverein in Verbindung und schlug u.a. vor Experimentalraketen zur Erforschung der seltsamen
Lichterscheinungen (das Wort UFO möchte ich hier vermeiden, da es
trotz seiner neutralen Bedeutung- falsch assoziiert wird) die immer wieder
über den Hessdalen Gebiet anzutreffen sind, zu erforschen.
Dort war man meinem Vorschlag sehr aufgeschlossen. Man bot mir sogar Hilfe
für den Transport der Geräte an!

Ich selbst habe mir, zumindest theoretisch schon sehr ausführlich überlegt,
wie eine Raketenstation zur Erforschung solcher Phänomäne aufgebaut sein
müßte.
Zuerst einmal müssen die unidentifizierbaren Leuchterscheinungen geortet
werden und dies muß schnell und sicher geschehen, denn zum einen sind die Erscheinungen sehr flüchtiger Natur und zum anderen sollte eine derartige Raketenstation nicht den Luftverkehr gefährden!

Ich gehe in meinen Überlegungen davon aus, dass alle sogenannten
echten UFOs also nach den heutigen Stand der Wissenschaft nicht
identifizierbaren Flugobjekte breitbandig elektromagnetische Wellen aussenden (immer
wieder wird berichtet, dass während einer UFO - Sichtung elektrische
Geräte aller Art ausfallen. Dies kann leicht erklärt werden, wenn man annimmt,
dass das Objekt Radiowellen mit hoher Intensität ausstrahlt und die umgebende
Luft ionisiert. Mir ist nicht bekannt, dass irgendeines der Objekte, die für
UFOs gehalten werden ein derartiges Verhalten zeigen!
Oder hat schon einmal die Venus oder ein Wetterballon den Radioempfang gestört?)
An verschiedenen Orten müssten zur Überwachung dieser Phänomäne automatisch
arbeitende Peilempfänger eingerichtet werden, die auf mehreren freien
Frequenzen ständig die Intensität und Richtung der einfallenden Strahlung
überwachen.
Sollten diese Peilempfänger feststellen, dass auf mehreren Frequenzen ein
erhöhter Signalpegel vorhanden ist und dass dieser aus der gleichen Richtung
kommt, so werden automatisch andere Peilstationen konsultiert, ob dort das
gleiche Ergebnis vorliegt.
Wenn mehr als 3 Stationen feststellen können, dass diese erhöhte Intensität
von einer einzigen Quelle stammt, wird UFO Alarm gegeben und in den Stationen andere Messgeräte wie Kameras und Spektroskope
aktiviert.
Gleichzeitig könnte von einer Station, die den mutmaßlichen UFO am nächsten liegt eine Experimentalrakete in Richtung auf das Objekt gestartet werden.
Diese Rakete sollte mit Kameras (am besten Video und Super 8), einen
Geigerzähler, einen Spektroskop, einen Thermometer und einen Ionisationsmesser
ausgerüstet sein.
Da mit sehr hohen Störfeldstärken zu rechnen ist, müssen alle Geräte so gut
wie möglich abgeschirmt sein.

Ein möglicher Ort, wo es sinnvoll wäre, ein derartiges Experiment aufzubauen, wäre
das Gebiet um Hessdalen in Norwegen, da hier zum einen wiederholt unidentifizierte Leuchterscheinungen auftreten und zum anderen das Areal dünn besiedelt ist und fern von Luftstraßen liegt.
Im Übrigen glaube ich nicht, dass UFOs außerirdische Raumfahrzeuge sind und ich
möchte hier auch keine Grundsatzdiskussion!
Es gibt aber einige UFO Meldungen, die aber bis heute auch von den hartnäckigsten
Skeptikern ausgeklammert werden!
So das Verschwinden des Piloten Frederick Valentich.
Als ich einmal bei der Flugsicherung in Melbourne in dieser Angelegenheit per e - Mail nachfragte, um die WAHRHEIT herauszufinden, bekam ich als Antwort einen Link auf den folgenden SEHR LESENSWERTEN Artikel (http://members.ozemail.com.au/~vufors/valensum.htm) zugeschickt, aus dem hervorgeht, daß hier etwas Unbekanntes im Spiel gewesen sein muß!
(Zum 20. Jahrestag des Verschwindens von Frederick Valentich wurde am Leuchtturm von Cape Otway, wo seine letzten Funksprüche empfangen wurden, ihn zu Ehren ein Denkmal errichtet( http://www.lightstation.com/unknown.htm).
Hier war sicherlich ein UNBEKANNTES Phänomän im Spiel!
Warum sollten wir ALLE Erscheinungen in unserer Umwelt kennen?
Ich glaube zwar nicht, daß außerirdische Raumschiffe die Erde besuchen, halte aber für möglich, daß manche UFOs unbekannte Zustandsformen der dunklen Materie oder multidimensionale Objekte sind (dies würde die ungeheure Manövrierbarkeit, die man den UFOs immer nachsagt, mühelos erklären).
Aus der Tatsache, daß durch dieses Phänomän Menschen zu Schaden gekommen sind, läßt sich aber sehr wohl ihre Erforschung (auch finanziell) rechtfertigen!
SeitenanfangVorheriger BeitragNächster BeitragSeitenende Link zu diesem Beitrag

Harald

Bewertung: -
Abstimmungen: 0 (Abstimmen!)

Veröffentlicht am Dienstag, 12. März 2002 - 22:40 Uhr:   Beitrag editierenBeitrag löschenSchnellansichtBeitrag drucken   Beitrag verschieben (Nur für Moderatoren)

Daß sich hinter den UFO - Phänomän wahrscheinlich doch eine physikalische Realität die nichts mit Außerirdischen zu tun haben muß !!) befindet, geht aus den e - Mails (in englischer Sprache) von einigen am Hessdalen - Projekt (http://www.hessdalen.org)beteiligten Astrophysikern hervor, die ich zu Beginn dieses Jahres erhielt. Ich habe sie gesammelt und bringe sie hier vor:

Dear Friends and Colleagues,

This letter regards the scientific interdisciplinary study of anomalus luminous atmospheric phenomena, of which the Hessdalen one is the prototype.

I enclose here a new missive from a physicist, Dr. Agnew. His theory is very interesting and must be tested. He precisely suggests us to use specific instrumentation. I think that his collaboration with our team can reveal to be very precious.

I think that an interdisciplinary cooperation, specifically restricted in the various fields of physics, astronomy, informatics, engineering, epistemology and documentation, will be extremely precious in order to shed more light on the Hessdalen-like phenomena everywhere in the world. I found at least 30 areas in the world in which similar phenomena are recurrent.

I remind you that after our two EMBLA expeditions, I received a request of collaboration and/or a manifestation of interest by several other physical scientists and scholars who operate in different fields. I can quote some of them: Prof. Tullio Regge (theoretical physics), Prof. Halton Arp (astrophysics and plasma physics), Prof. Auguste Meessen (theoretical physics), Prof. Cristiano Cosmovici (bioastronomy), Dr. David Fryberger (theoretical physics - vorton theory), Dr. Geoffrey Endean (theoretical physics - pulsar-model for ball lightning), Dr. Mario Rabinowitz (theoretical physics - mini-black hole model for ball lightning), Dr. Hiroshi Yamakawa (theoretical physics, SETV), Dr. Albino Carbognani (physics of ball lightning); Dr. Allen Tough (SETI); astronomer Eamonn Ansbro (spectrographic technology and SETV), NASA-JPL scientist Scot Stride (space engineering and SETV), Eng. Roy Dutton (astronautical theory for SETV), Dr. Claude Gaudeau (ESA), Eng. Jan Jacques Velasco (CNES-SEPRA), Eng. Marcel Delaval (JRC-EURATOM and scientific Ufo expert), Dr. Hugh Deasy (astronomy), Dr. Bruce Cornet (paleontobiologist - scientific documentation of the Pine Bush cases), Mrs. Jennifer Mallet Jarvis (observational documentation of the Ontario cases), Dr. Valdimir Rubtsov (RIAP), Dr. France St. Laurent (geophysics of "earthlights"), Mr. Renzo Cabassi (coordinator of the Italian Committee for Project Hessdalen), Harald Lutz (VLF-ELF expert), Dr. Stefania Genovese (philosophy and epistemology and scientific Ufo expert). Their competences can be united with ours (astrophysics, physics, optronics, SETI-SETV, radio physics and engineering).

Any cross-confrontation of our experiences, even if in the ambit of different theories, disciplines and interpretations, can be very fruitful to all of us, expecially because we are all linked by a common method and scientific dialectics. In spite of the different approaches, I think we can construct something all together, expecially because, more or less, the different theories can be tested experimentally.

I think that the most important goal in this research can be mainly resumed in two questions (whatever the phenomenon is): 1) How does it work? 2) Can we brindle that energy in our laboratories?


Wishes to All of You for a fruitful scientific 2002

Massimo Teodorani, Ph.D.
Astrophysicist
CNR-IRA
Italy




Dr. Agnew message follows here.

-----Messaggio Originale-----
Da: bagnew@charter.net
A: mteo@linenet.it
Cc: earthfiles@earthfiles.com
Data invio: sabato 5 gennaio 2002 3.02
Oggetto: Proposed Plasma Theory by Dr. Agnew.


Dear Dr. Teodorani:

I read your interview with Linda. I have seen these lights before. In experimenting with long-wave radiation using focused antennae we have seen an aurora ceated on a small scale. The HAARP unit in Alaska has also created such a phenomenon over Pheonix, Arizona by bouncing their focused beam off the ionosphere. There is a heater in Russia and one in China as well. The US unit is capable of 1 billion watts.

I have worked with Dr. Nich Begich on a filmed documentary on the subject in 1997. I have never seen the phenomenon occur so close the ground, as your films indicate. This is profoundly disturbing. An ion path convergence like this could be the result of supersaturation of the ionized gases in our atmosphere. The fact they are releasing energy as light and some heat is a sign the ions cannot absorb any more energy, but are discharging it. A large enough discharge can result in a Solar Tap.

Also known as an ionospheric breakdown (extends from the lower ionosphere to ground) the results can be catastrophic. A single pulse may generate 2.8 megatons of energy. The Solar Tap is theorized to pulse at around 10 cps. Once the activation energy is achieved, the Solar Tap may exist for as much as 30 to 40 seconds. This may result in a sustained release of 500 to 700 megatons of explosive energy. Once the ion capacity is depleted below the capacitive imedance, the pulses will cease, and the ozone layer will be nearly 100% deionized. It could take as much as 25 years to recover. The particulate matter blown into the sky could result in collapsed sky conditions and trigger global cooling of 3 to 4 degrees Celsius. It may also reduce oceanic photosynthesis by as much as 40%.

I would suggest taking measurements with a radio antenna capable of detecting 140 to 500 megahertz. I suggest at least 6 elements in the square wave configuration for best directionality. Use a recording spectrograph. Be aware that strong harmonics in the 3,500 hertz range may be present as well. See if you can get a near or mid-IR laser through the ball with a FTIR spectrometer on the other side. This could provide excellent molecular properties. Field units can shoot for 5 miles or more as long as you have good line of sight.

I would love to work with you on this, but I am only available for short trips. I will freely contribute what I can.

Thanks and good luck,

Brooks A. Agnew, Phd Physics, BS Analytical Chemistry, MS Statistics
5636 Sussex Lane
Morristown, TN 37814
423-587-5231



Dear Massimo,


I agree with you completely in regards to the need for interdisciplinary
collaboration and support. We all have our areas of expertise and talent
which should be harnessed in an organized way. We do not need more
theories at this time, which only serves to further burden the
under-funded experimentalists. What we need are better measured data from
a variety of appropriate instruments. If the main goal is to get better
measured data on the luminous phenomena, then we can start by reviewing
your experimental procedures and suggesting ways to change or optimize
it. I don't have to remind you that your results are only as strong as
your data. These pioneering experiments and observations are very
different and unusual. If the findings are to carry any scientific weight
then they must stand up to peer scrutiny. For this reason your
experiments and procedures should be able to be duplicated by other
researchers in other parts of the world. What can be done is to establish
a standard set of procedures that can be used to research this particular
phenomena. This is what we should collaborate on. If this is done, well
documented, and made available to other scientists interested in adding
more observational data on this phenomena, then the Hessdalen experiments
can be replicated elsewhere leading to a much larger set of reliable data
to analyze.


I believe through your work at Hessdalen, in collaboration with Erling
Strand, that the anomalous thermal plasmas/ionizations being observed are
real. It may prove a lot harder to explain how it works, and much better
to quantify the phenomena to the point of placing bounds on measured
energy levels, sizes, shapes, IR/Vis/UV emission spectra, kinematics, VLF
fundamental/harmonic frequencies, and other measurable parameters. I
propose that you lay the ground work for studying this and other
anomalous observable phenomena, with the ultimate goal of determining
whether it is natural, manmade or something else.


If you could post your current plans, schedule, methodology,
instrumentation, etc on your website, we could look it over and help you
with suggestions for optimizing the observational approach.


Sincerely,


Scot L. Stride

NASA-JPL-Caltech

Spacecraft Telecommunications Hardware Engineer

sstride@jpl.nasa.gov

*******************************



At 04:48 PM 1/5/02 +0100, Teodorani Massimo wrote:

>>>>

Dear Friends and Colleagues, This letter regards the scientific
interdisciplinary study of anomalous luminous atmospheric phenomena, of
which the Hessdalen one is the prototype. I enclose here a new missive
>from a physicist, Dr. Agnew. His theory is very interesting and must be
tested. He precisely suggests us to use specific instrumentation. I
think that his collaboration with our team can reveal to be very
precious. I think that an interdisciplinary cooperation, specifically
restricted in the various fields of physics, astronomy, informatics,
engineering, epistemology and documentation, will be extremely precious
in order to shed more light on the Hessdalen-like phenomena everywhere
in the world. I found at least 30 areas in the world in which similar
phenomena are recurrent. I remind you that after our two EMBLA
expeditions, I received a request of collaboration and/or a
manifestation of interest by several other physical scientists and
scholars who operate in different fields. I can quote some of them: Prof.
Tullio Regge (theoretical physics), Prof. Halton Arp (astrophysics and
plasma physics), Prof. Auguste Meessen (theoretical physics), Prof.
Cristiano Cosmovici (bioastronomy), Dr. David Fryberger (theoretical
physics - vorton theory), Dr. Geoffrey Endean (theoretical physics -
pulsar-model for ball lightning), Dr. Mario Rabinowitz (theoretical
physics - mini-black hole model for ball lightning), Dr. Hiroshi
Yamakawa (theoretical physics, SETV), Dr. Albino Carbognani (physics of
ball lightning); Dr. Allen Tough (SETI); astronomer Eamonn Ansbro
(spectrographic technology and SETV), NASA-JPL scientist Scot Stride
(space engineering and SETV), Eng. Roy Dutton (astronautical theory for
SETV), Dr. Claude Gaudeau (ESA), Eng. Jan Jacques Velasco (CNES-SEPRA),
Eng. Marcel Delaval (JRC-EURATOM and scientific Ufo expert), Dr. Hugh
Deasy (astronomy), Dr. Bruce Cornet (paleontobiologist - scientific
documentation of the Pine Bush cases), Mrs. Jennifer Mallet Jarvis
(observational documentation of the Ontario cases), Dr. Valdimir Rubtsov
(RIAP), Dr. France St. Laurent (geophysics of "earthlights"), Mr. Renzo
Cabassi (coordinator of the Italian Committee for Project Hessdalen),
Harald Lutz (VLF-ELF expert), Dr. Stefania Genovese (philosophy and
epistemology and scientific Ufo expert). Their competences can be united
with ours (astrophysics, physics, optronics, SETI-SETV, radio physics
and engineering). Any cross-confrontation of our experiences, even if
in the ambit of different theories, disciplines and interpretations, can
be very fruitful to all of us, expecially because we are all linked by a
common method and scientific dialectics. In spite of the different
approaches, I think we can construct something all together, expecially
because, more or less, the different theories can be tested
experimentally. I think that the most important goal in this research
can be mainly resumed in two questions (whatever the phenomenon is): 1)
How does it work? 2) Can we brindle that energy in our laboratories?


Wishes to All of You for a fruitful scientific 2002

Massimo Teodorani, Ph.D.

Astrophysicist

CNR-IRA Italy
SeitenanfangVorheriger BeitragNächster BeitragSeitenende Link zu diesem Beitrag

Harald

Bewertung: -
Abstimmungen: 0 (Abstimmen!)

Veröffentlicht am Dienstag, 12. März 2002 - 22:40 Uhr:   Beitrag editierenBeitrag löschenSchnellansichtBeitrag drucken   Beitrag verschieben (Nur für Moderatoren)

Dr. Agnew message follows here.

-----Messaggio Originale-----
Da: bagnew@charter.net
A: mteo@linenet.it
Cc: earthfiles@earthfiles.com
Data invio: sabato 5 gennaio 2002 3.02
Oggetto: Proposed Plasma Theory by Dr. Agnew.


Dear Dr. Teodorani:

I read your interview with Linda. I have seen these lights before. In experimenting with long-wave radiation using focused antennae we have seen an aurora ceated on a small scale. The HAARP unit in Alaska has also created such a phenomenon over Pheonix, Arizona by bouncing their focused beam off the ionosphere. There is a heater in Russia and one in China as well. The US unit is capable of 1 billion watts.

I have worked with Dr. Nich Begich on a filmed documentary on the subject in 1997. I have never seen the phenomenon occur so close the ground, as your films indicate. This is profoundly disturbing. An ion path convergence like this could be the result of supersaturation of the ionized gases in our atmosphere. The fact they are releasing energy as light and some heat is a sign the ions cannot absorb any more energy, but are discharging it. A large enough discharge can result in a Solar Tap.

Also known as an ionospheric breakdown (extends from the lower ionosphere to ground) the results can be catastrophic. A single pulse may generate 2.8 megatons of energy. The Solar Tap is theorized to pulse at around 10 cps. Once the activation energy is achieved, the Solar Tap may exist for as much as 30 to 40 seconds. This may result in a sustained release of 500 to 700 megatons of explosive energy. Once the ion capacity is depleted below the capacitive imedance, the pulses will cease, and the ozone layer will be nearly 100% deionized. It could take as much as 25 years to recover. The particulate matter blown into the sky could result in collapsed sky conditions and trigger global cooling of 3 to 4 degrees Celsius. It may also reduce oceanic photosynthesis by as much as 40%.

I would suggest taking measurements with a radio antenna capable of detecting 140 to 500 megahertz. I suggest at least 6 elements in the square wave configuration for best directionality. Use a recording spectrograph. Be aware that strong harmonics in the 3,500 hertz range may be present as well. See if you can get a near or mid-IR laser through the ball with a FTIR spectrometer on the other side. This could provide excellent molecular properties. Field units can shoot for 5 miles or more as long as you have good line of sight.

I would love to work with you on this, but I am only available for short trips. I will freely contribute what I can.

Thanks and good luck,

Brooks A. Agnew, Phd Physics, BS Analytical Chemistry, MS Statistics
5636 Sussex Lane
Morristown, TN 37814
423-587-5231



Dear Massimo,


I agree with you completely in regards to the need for interdisciplinary
collaboration and support. We all have our areas of expertise and talent
which should be harnessed in an organized way. We do not need more
theories at this time, which only serves to further burden the
under-funded experimentalists. What we need are better measured data from
a variety of appropriate instruments. If the main goal is to get better
measured data on the luminous phenomena, then we can start by reviewing
your experimental procedures and suggesting ways to change or optimize
it. I don't have to remind you that your results are only as strong as
your data. These pioneering experiments and observations are very
different and unusual. If the findings are to carry any scientific weight
then they must stand up to peer scrutiny. For this reason your
experiments and procedures should be able to be duplicated by other
researchers in other parts of the world. What can be done is to establish
a standard set of procedures that can be used to research this particular
phenomena. This is what we should collaborate on. If this is done, well
documented, and made available to other scientists interested in adding
more observational data on this phenomena, then the Hessdalen experiments
can be replicated elsewhere leading to a much larger set of reliable data
to analyze.


I believe through your work at Hessdalen, in collaboration with Erling
Strand, that the anomalous thermal plasmas/ionizations being observed are
real. It may prove a lot harder to explain how it works, and much better
to quantify the phenomena to the point of placing bounds on measured
energy levels, sizes, shapes, IR/Vis/UV emission spectra, kinematics, VLF
fundamental/harmonic frequencies, and other measurable parameters. I
propose that you lay the ground work for studying this and other
anomalous observable phenomena, with the ultimate goal of determining
whether it is natural, manmade or something else.


If you could post your current plans, schedule, methodology,
instrumentation, etc on your website, we could look it over and help you
with suggestions for optimizing the observational approach.


Sincerely,


Scot L. Stride

NASA-JPL-Caltech

Spacecraft Telecommunications Hardware Engineer

sstride@jpl.nasa.gov

*******************************



At 04:48 PM 1/5/02 +0100, Teodorani Massimo wrote:

>>>>

Dear Friends and Colleagues, This letter regards the scientific
interdisciplinary study of anomalous luminous atmospheric phenomena, of
which the Hessdalen one is the prototype. I enclose here a new missive
>from a physicist, Dr. Agnew. His theory is very interesting and must be
tested. He precisely suggests us to use specific instrumentation. I
think that his collaboration with our team can reveal to be very
precious. I think that an interdisciplinary cooperation, specifically
restricted in the various fields of physics, astronomy, informatics,
engineering, epistemology and documentation, will be extremely precious
in order to shed more light on the Hessdalen-like phenomena everywhere
in the world. I found at least 30 areas in the world in which similar
phenomena are recurrent. I remind you that after our two EMBLA
expeditions, I received a request of collaboration and/or a
manifestation of interest by several other physical scientists and
scholars who operate in different fields. I can quote some of them: Prof.
Tullio Regge (theoretical physics), Prof. Halton Arp (astrophysics and
plasma physics), Prof. Auguste Meessen (theoretical physics), Prof.
Cristiano Cosmovici (bioastronomy), Dr. David Fryberger (theoretical
physics - vorton theory), Dr. Geoffrey Endean (theoretical physics -
pulsar-model for ball lightning), Dr. Mario Rabinowitz (theoretical
physics - mini-black hole model for ball lightning), Dr. Hiroshi
Yamakawa (theoretical physics, SETV), Dr. Albino Carbognani (physics of
ball lightning); Dr. Allen Tough (SETI); astronomer Eamonn Ansbro
(spectrographic technology and SETV), NASA-JPL scientist Scot Stride
(space engineering and SETV), Eng. Roy Dutton (astronautical theory for
SETV), Dr. Claude Gaudeau (ESA), Eng. Jan Jacques Velasco (CNES-SEPRA),
Eng. Marcel Delaval (JRC-EURATOM and scientific Ufo expert), Dr. Hugh
Deasy (astronomy), Dr. Bruce Cornet (paleontobiologist - scientific
documentation of the Pine Bush cases), Mrs. Jennifer Mallet Jarvis
(observational documentation of the Ontario cases), Dr. Valdimir Rubtsov
(RIAP), Dr. France St. Laurent (geophysics of "earthlights"), Mr. Renzo
Cabassi (coordinator of the Italian Committee for Project Hessdalen),
Harald Lutz (VLF-ELF expert), Dr. Stefania Genovese (philosophy and
epistemology and scientific Ufo expert). Their competences can be united
with ours (astrophysics, physics, optronics, SETI-SETV, radio physics
and engineering). Any cross-confrontation of our experiences, even if
in the ambit of different theories, disciplines and interpretations, can
be very fruitful to all of us, expecially because we are all linked by a
common method and scientific dialectics. In spite of the different
approaches, I think we can construct something all together, expecially
because, more or less, the different theories can be tested
experimentally. I think that the most important goal in this research
can be mainly resumed in two questions (whatever the phenomenon is): 1)
How does it work? 2) Can we brindle that energy in our laboratories?


Wishes to All of You for a fruitful scientific 2002

Massimo Teodorani, Ph.D.

Astrophysicist

CNR-IRA Italy



Dr. Agnew message follows here.


-----Messaggio Originale----- Da:
bagnew@charter.net A:
href="mailto:mteo@linenet.it">mteo@linenet.it Cc:
href="mailto:earthfiles@earthfiles.com">earthfiles@earthfiles.com Data
invio: sabato 5 gennaio 2002 3.02 Oggetto:

Proposed Plasma Theory by Dr. Agnew.


Dear Dr. Teodorani: I read your interview with Linda. I have seen
these lights before. In experimenting with long-wave radiation using
focused antennae we have seen an aurora ceated on a small scale. The
HAARP unit in Alaska has also created such a phenomenon over Pheonix,
Arizona by bouncing their focused beam off the ionosphere. There is a
heater in Russia and one in China as well. The US unit is capable of 1
billion watts. I have worked with Dr. Nich Begich on a filmed
documentary on the subject in 1997. I have never seen the phenomenon
occur so close the ground, as your films indicate. This is profoundly
disturbing. An ion path convergence like this could be the result of
supersaturation of the ionized gases in our atmosphere. The fact they
are releasing energy as light and some heat is a sign the ions cannot
absorb any more energy, but are discharging it. A large enough
discharge can result in a Solar Tap. Also known as an ionospheric
breakdown (extends from the lower ionosphere to ground) the results can
be catastrophic. A single pulse may generate 2.8 megatons of energy.
The Solar Tap is theorized to pulse at around 10 cps. Once the
activation energy is achieved, the Solar Tap may exist for as much as 30
to 40 seconds. This may result in a sustained release of 500 to 700
megatons of explosive energy. Once the ion capacity is depleted below
the capacitive imedance, the pulses will cease, and the ozone layer will
be nearly 100% deionized. It could take as much as 25 years to recover.
The particulate matter blown into the sky could result in collapsed sky
conditions and trigger global cooling of 3 to 4 degrees Celsius. It may
also reduce oceanic photosynthesis by as much as 40%. I would suggest
taking measurements with a radio antenna capable of detecting 140 to 500
megahertz. I suggest at least 6 elements in the square wave
configuration for best directionality. Use a recording spectrograph.
Be aware that strong harmonics in the 3,500 hertz range may be present
as well. See if you can get a near or mid-IR laser through the ball
with a FTIR spectrometer on the other side. This could provide
excellent molecular properties. Field units can shoot for 5 miles or
more as long as you have good line of sight. I would love to work with
you on this, but I am only available for short trips. I will freely
contribute what I can. Thanks and good luck, Brooks A. Agnew, Phd
size=2>Physics, BS Analytical Chemistry, MS Statistics 5636 Sussex Lane
Morristown, TN 37814 423-587-5231


> I agree with you completely in regards to the need for interdisciplinary collaboration and support. We all have our areas of expertise and talent which should be harnessed in an organized way.



Organization is one of my teutonic anti-italian orgasms, if the avaliable funds are able to permit it. Nevertheless, there may exist somewhere a mental organization out of money. There may be some dialectics which can allow joint projects, even if this will cost a lot of fighting. But I am a Celt (yes: they were in this part of Italy too), and I like fighting, in the sense that I like destruction and reconstruction. Constructively, as a goal, of course.

> We do not need more theories at this time, which only serves to further burden the under-funded experimentalists.

Theories of different kinds can trigger the mind anyway, and make all of us kind of careful in all of our actions. Not all of these theories are based on mental masturbations, they are just a dynamics of the mind - skeptical or not, mistaken or not, it doesn't matter - which may bring an etherogeneous group of scholars towards the right path just after a healthy and violent intellectual quarrel. Then, after the storm, the possibility which remains is only one.

Anyway, when the money-funds are missing, it paradoxically seems that the mind works better, at least at certain levels: you know, a fast car needs gasoline anyway.

It's just a little, but we have to take this fact into account. It moves the events also through errors, and you'll see it.

> What we need are better measured data from a variety of appropriate instruments.

OK, I totally agree with you, of course. I knew it since 1994: I have a NASA-like plan ready, covered with cobwebs if I must be honest, but ready: I know everything of the potentialities of military apparatuses, expecially if linked with astronomical ones. Yes: appropriate instruments, but appropriate men too. For instance: huge money funds are a big loss when a business-man leading NASA sends a $-billion-rated probe to crash against Mars (did you send him to fuck off yet or not?).

> If the main goal is to get better measured data on the luminous phenomena, then we can start by reviewing your experimental procedures and suggesting ways to change or optimize it.

-W-e- W-h-o-?

The procedures adopted by EMBLA were obviously limited because of the available budget, they were driven just by the available money-funds at that time. All the rest was an enormous sacrifice. And I am ready to do it again.

( We who? I am one of you, not a lactant playing with his balls)

> I don't have to remind you that your results are only as strong as your data.

Probably, but not surely. I will do it again N times with increasingly high money-budget, it seems. And results are an exponential function of money availability, and an inverse exponential function of something else which I prefere not to quote here.

There is time, anyway.



> These pioneering experiments and observations are very different and unusual.

Different from what?

If the findings are to carry any scientific weight then they must stand up to peer scrutiny.

OK, true: that's one of my goals and habits (at least in the more conventional and safe astronomy), but certainly not the main one. But, a peer scrutiny from whom in this specific case? That's the point. It seems that the very most part of peer scrutiny processes are a linear function of political power in science, and of the business and/or collusive aptitude of scientific editors, from times to times. Scientific reviewers are almost everywhere leaded by a sort of "mafia", a human aptitude which normally is born inside lobbies (sort of cocktail parties populated by conclaimed harlots who are generally unconscious of what they are). I know it well. Nevertheless I plug my nose, and I use to submit my works as you maybe can check in the NASA-ADS website. I would like to submit papers to whom I estimate for his atarassic, honest and transparent aptitude, but it doesn't happen always. There are anyway and fortunately some scientific reviews of good official level in the world which are still suitable in this sense: at least 5 between the well-known ones in our official ambients. Of which: four of physics, one of astronomy.

I have a strong feeling that the peer scrutinizers of nowadays in general do not know enough about a specific subject, in the sense that they have no sufficient input data to judge, because they are mentally constipated, in fact they aptitude to judge is just irrational. Nevertheless they are necessary, because the world goes in this way. A scientific consensus (positive or negative) must come out (oh my God... It reminds me a film: "Willard and the Mice") anyway, by trespassing our mistakes, of all of us.

It will come out anyway.

> For this reason your experiments and procedures should be able to be duplicated by other researchers in other parts of the world.

You already know that few areas of the globe offer the same characteristics as some specific areas (many). Therefore peer reviewers should lift their ass in order to go there and repeat experiments or do their ones: There.

They are the first ones to think to ... ET when they read certain papers (according to the comics they studied when they were attending university), therefore they should scrutinize their subconscious first, before proceeding in the scrutinizing process of objective events which are external to their not free thinking, sometimes.

> What can be done is to establish a standard set of procedures that can be used to research this particular phenomena. This is what we should collaborate on.

One of the several persons who is "inside the front" is just testing this possibility. And it is not the only one. Total agreement with you regarding scientific rigour in experiments, but it seems that noone in the world is willing to promote these experiments (including scientific rigour in them), and I know very well the reason of it. Extremely well and clearly.



Rigorous experiments will be carried out indeed and anyway, out of any "authority" and its permissions. There are several honest ways to obtain money-funds. And the scientific consensus will be obtained out of any pressure by any state-globalization. Scientific institutes CAN be penetrated, also by inside.

This research is For All Mankind, not for cocktail parties of para-judaic or massonic lobbies.

>If this is done, well documented, and made available to other scientists interested in adding more observational data on this phenomena, then the Hessdalen experiments can be replicated elsewhere leading to a much larger set of reliable data to analyze.

OK. A good discovery. The Hessdalen "experiments" will be repeated and replicated by others, but a judge will be present at their replications.

> I believe through your work at Hessdalen, in collaboration with Erling Strand, that the anomalous thermal plasmas/ionizations being observed are real. It may prove a lot harder to explain how it works, and much better to quantify the phenomena to the point of placing bounds on measured energy levels, sizes, shapes, IR/Vis/UV emission spectra, kinematics, VLF fundamental/harmonic frequencies, and other measurable parameters. I propose that you lay the ground work for studying this and other anomalous observable phenomena, with the ultimate goal of determining whether it is natural, manmade or something else.

Exactly what I am doing since ten years.

If you could post your current plans, schedule, methodology, instrumentation, etc on your website, we could look it over and help you with suggestions for optimizing the observational approach.

I will not post them, but publish them first and then post the reference. I will do the next experiments myself first.

Thank you, Scot, for your comments.


Massimo Teodorani
CNR-IRA
Padania - Europe
SeitenanfangVorheriger BeitragNächster BeitragSeitenende Link zu diesem Beitrag

Harald Lutz (Haraldl)

Bewertung: -
Abstimmungen: 0 (Abstimmen!)

Veröffentlicht am Sonntag, 16. Juni 2002 - 21:09 Uhr:   Beitrag editierenBeitrag löschenSchnellansichtBeitrag drucken   Beitrag verschieben (Nur für Moderatoren)

1,1
SeitenanfangVorheriger BeitragNächster BeitragSeitenende Link zu diesem Beitrag

Harald Lutz (Haraldl)

Bewertung: -
Abstimmungen: 0 (Abstimmen!)

Veröffentlicht am Montag, 17. Juni 2002 - 09:09 Uhr:   Beitrag editierenBeitrag löschenSchnellansichtBeitrag drucken   Beitrag verschieben (Nur für Moderatoren)

1
SeitenanfangVorheriger BeitragNächster BeitragSeitenende Link zu diesem Beitrag

Harald Lutz (Haraldl)

Bewertung: -
Abstimmungen: 0 (Abstimmen!)

Veröffentlicht am Montag, 17. Juni 2002 - 09:11 Uhr:   Beitrag editierenBeitrag löschenSchnellansichtBeitrag drucken   Beitrag verschieben (Nur für Moderatoren)

Für alle Faulen hier noch einmal der Artikel auf http://members.ozemail.com.au/~vufors/valensum.htm:


The Frederick Valentich Disappearance
by Paul Norman
During the evening of October 21, 1978, twenty year old Australian Pilot Frederick Valentich disappeared over Bass Strait, while flying from Melbourne's Moorabbin Airport to King Island, off the coast of Victoria. His last communication occurred at 7:12 p.m., during the largest UFO flap in Australian history. Nearly fourteen years after that fatal Saturday evening, no trace has ever been found of either the pilot or his blue and white Cessna model 182 aircraft.
During my travels and correspondence, I have found many false stories circulating around the world regarding this most important case. I have found that these inaccurate statements are coming from individuals at home and abroad. These are people who live thousands of kilometres from the scene where the action took place, newcomers to the field, journalists who write about everything and are experts on nothing except misquotations and out of context reporting and last but not least, "Professors of Impossibility" from the scientific community who have concocted preconceived opinions and have tried to make their ideas fit around them.
Frederick Valentich was not the only person who reported a strange object over and near Bass Strait that day and night. Researchers have found over fifty reported observations in that area which occurred before, during and after his encounter. Most of this information would never have been found without the diligence of researchers from the Victorian UFO Research Society, based at Moorabbin, near the location from whence the mysterious flight originated.
The Bass Strait Flap had been building up for over six weeks prior to the pilot's disappearance. The UFO flap reached a peak that very weekend of October 21st. More daytime sightings were reported that day than in any flap period that we have ever investigated. Many of these reports have been published in the VUFORS publication, AUSTRALIAN UFO BULLETIN, the MUFON UFO JOURNAL, the INTERNATIONAL UFO REPORTER and other publications throughout the world.
It is a confirmed fact that many UFOs were reported in the vicinity of King Island and the area around Bass Strait on that day and night. Two months prior to this fateful event, we were receiving increasing telephone calls from individuals reporting strange lights in the sky. About this same time UFO reports were being passed on to the police and the King Island News. We were not aware of the reports occurring on this island until they were forwarded to us after news of the pilot's disappearance became known.
On that same day and night something strange was taking place in the Melbourne and Victorian skies as well as over Bass Strait. That is the inescapable conclusion from startling files of evidence compiled by investigators in the vicinity. Documented interviews with people from unrelated locations up to 300 kilometres apart told similar stories of round objects, star-fish shaped objects and silver cigar shaped UFOs moving slowly in the sky apparently with no visible means of propulsion, no wings and no sound.
ACTUAL TRANSCRIPTION OF MELBOURNE FLIGHT SERVICE
The transcript portion of the communication between Valentich and Melbourne Flight Service as released by the Australian Department of Transport follows: (FS - Flight Service, DSJ - Frederick Valentich aircraft designation).
1906:14 DSJ Melbourne, this is Delta Sierra Juliet. Is there any known traffic below five thousand?
FS Delta Sierra Juliet, no known traffic.
DSJ Delta Sierra Juliet, I am, seems to be a large aircraft below five thousand.
1906:44 FS Delta Sierra Juliet, What type of aircraft is it?
DSJ Delta Sierra Juliet, I cannot affirm, it is four bright, it seems to me like landing lights.
1907 FS Delta Sierra Juliet.
1907:31 DSJ Melbourne, this is Delta Sierra Juliet, the aircraft has just passed over me at least a thousand feet above.
FS Delta Sierra Juliet, roger, and it is a large aircraft, confirmed?
DSJ Er-unknown, due to the speed it's travelling, is there any air force aircraft in the vicinity?
FS Delta Sierra Juliet, no known aircraft in the vicinity.
1908:18 DSJ Melbourne, it's approaching now from due east towards me.
FS Delta Sierra Juliet.
1908:41 DSJ (open microphone for two seconds.)
1908:48 DSJ Delta Sierra Juliet, it seems to me that he's playing some sort of game, he's flying over me two, three times at speeds I could not identify.
1909 FS Delta Sierra Juliet, roger, what is your actual level?
DSJ My level is four and a half thousand, four five zero zero.
FS Delta Sierra Juliet, and you confirm you cannot identify the aircraft?
DSJ Affirmative.
FS Delta Sierra Juliet, roger, stand by.
1909:27 DSJ Melbourne, Delta Sierra Juliet, it's not an aircraft it is (open microphone for two seconds).
1909:42 FS Delta Sierra Juliet, can you describe the -er- aircraft?
DSJ Delta Sierra Juliet, as it's flying past it's a long shape (open microphone for three seconds) cannot identify more than it has such speed (open microphone for three seconds). It's before me right now Melbourne.
1910 FS Delta Sierra Juliet, roger and how large would the - er - object be?
1910:19 DSJ Delta Sierra Juliet, Melbourne, it seems like it's stationary. What I'm doing right now is orbiting and the thing is just orbiting on top of me also. It's got a green light and sort of metallic like, it's all shiny on the outside.
FS Delta Sierra Juliet
1910:46 DSJ Delta Sierra Juliet (open microphone for three seconds) It's just vanished.
FS Delta Sierra Juliet
1911 DSJ Melbourne, would you know what kind of aircraft I've got? Is it a military aircraft?
FS Delta Sierra Juliet, Confirm the - er ~ aircraft just vanished.
DSJ Say again.
FS Delta Sierra Juliet, is the aircraft still with you?
DSJ Delta Sierra Juliet; it's (open microphone for two seconds) now approaching from the south-west.
FS Delta Sierra Juliet
1911:50 DSJ Delta Sierra Juliet, the engine is rough-idling. I've got it set at twenty three twenty-four and the thing is coughing.
FS Delta Sierra Juliet, roger, what are your intentions?
DSJ My intentions are - ah - to go to King Island - ah - Melbourne. That strange aircraft is hovering on top of me again (open microphone for two seconds). It is hovering and it's not an aircraft.
FS Delta Sierra Juliet.
1912:28 DSJ Delta Sierra Juliet. Melbourne (open microphone for seventeen seconds).
No official conclusion has been given for the strange sound which was heard that interrupted the last statement of the pilot.
The Valentich encounter is almost a carbon copy of the experience of a four man crew aboard an Army helicopter who encountered a frightening event on 18 October, 1973, almost five years to the day prior to the Valentich disappearance.
Captain Lawrence Coyne was flying near Mansfield, Ohio at 2500 feet when a crew member notified the captain that an object was approaching on a collision course. Coyne then initiated a 'Control descent to 1700 feet. The UFO took up a position just ahead of the helicopter which was flying at 100 knots. The pilot was amazed his helicopter was climbing even though his controls were in descending position. At 3500 feet there was a thump when the helicopter broke loose from the object.
During this period Coyne tried to contact air fields nearby but both UHF and VHF frequencies had failed. Coyne also reported that his compass was rotating slowly. The shape of the object was described as cigar or long shaped and its manoeuvrability was identical to the one reported by Valentich. The instruments were later checked out in Cleveland and found to be satisfactory. In this case Larry Coyne and his crew got back to tell the story, Frederick Valentich did not.
While military and civilian aircraft searched the area over Bass Strait, VUFORS investigators concentrated their efforts with interviews of witnesses who had reported objects they had seen flying that same day and night. Some examples of reports follow: (Names are on file with VUFORS) Currie, King Island, 2:00 p.m.: The sky was clear, except one large cloud directly overhead. Out of this cloud came an object similar to a huge golf ball about a quarter-size of the moon. The object was white or silver in colour. It moved slowly to the west toward the sea. The UFO stopped at an angle of 70 degrees above the horizon, then started moving back in the direction from whence it came. At that time there was no wind. The cloud remained stationary. The UFO was the only object seen to be moving in the sky. No balloons are released at King Island on the weekends.
Beginning less than one hour after the King Island UFO was seen, twin cigar shaped objects were reported to be moving from west to east over Victoria, near Bass Strait. They were last seen about 4:30 p.m. when suddenly they changed colour from silver to white, made a sweeping curve to the north and sped away. The movement of these objects was traced by interviewing witnesses scattered along a flight path until the objects sped away. The observers nearest to the UFOs were almost directly udder the objects. They described them to be about three-quarters the size of a Boeing 747 aircraft, joined together with two silver beams. They were last seen over the ranges near Cape Otway.
At 6:45 p.m., just 21 minutes before Pilot Valentich radioed Melbourne Flight Service that he was encountering an unknown aircraft, Roy Manifold, of Melbourne, photographed on 35mm film, an object hurtling in a blur of speed and mist out of the water neat Cape Otway lighthouse. All modes of computer analysis were used to gain data. including edge enhancement, colour contouring, digitising and filtering. The analysis was made by GSW and critique issued by William H. Spaulding, GSW Director. The photos were also examined by other photo specialists.
Publication of the photos brought "Professors of Impossibility" out of their arm chairs for another debunking attempt. They decreed that the photos showed "a cloud or a puff of smoke". VUFORS advisors quickly exploded this hasty announcement. The object appears only in two of the six pictures, taken while the camera was in automatic sequencing. The time interval between each photograph is confirmed by the setting sun's Position. In the last picture the so called cloud is already nine degrees into the shot. This means it would have been moving at 200 miles per hour. It is not possible for a cloud or puff of smoke to move at this speed on a calm day.
Communications between Valentich and Melbourne Flight Service were recorded from 7:06 to 7:12 p.m., before an unexplained sound abruptly terminated the voice communications. During that time, twenty people located in different areas around Bass Strait observed a green light in the same direction and at the same time the pilot was reporting the approach and description of an object with a green light.
In addition, other reports have been forthcoming, such as: In the southern suburb of Frankston, a mother and four teenagers reported what appeared to resemble a sky rocket, although the object was stationary. The colour appeared to be a mixture of red, pink and white. The witnesses estimated the object to be a quarter-size of the moon. The mother said that at the time of the sighting she did not realise it was a UFO, until later when she learned that other people had seen the same object. At the same time, a bank manager and his wife, while driving on the highway west of Melbourne, observed a star-fish shaped object out over the Strait. They noticed green flickering lights at the ends. The couple are of the opinion that it was the same object that Valentich was reporting before the strange sound jammed his radio transmission.
Another sighting was reported from Ormond, a suburb in southern Melbourne, occurring at 7:15 p.m. when lights were noted in a cigar shaped arrangement. The lights were described as looking like "silver rain" as they appeared to fall or else were turned off from top to bottom.
Two lads were out in the street communicating with their walkie-talkies when they saw a star-shaped object appear at a low altitude over their heads. It was moving slightly faster than an aircraft as if oh an approach run to an airport. During the observation both witnesses recall a sound like a low pulsating ,hum was associated with the object. Each of the walkie-talkies first became jammed with static then communication was lost altogether, even though the lads were only a short distance apart. Communication was restored when the UFO flew away. Their description was of an object with bright white lights placed intermittently at each tip of a star-fish shaped object and at Various points along the arcs to the tips.
There were many other similar reports of flying objects throughout southern Victoria during that same day and night and they continued for several days following this strange encounter. These reports were being referred to VUFORS from various sources.
An outstanding sighting was reported on Monday evening, 23 October, 1978, only two days later. It occurred at 9.00 p.m. as two families were preparing to leave the beach. They saw a cigar shaped light speeding low over Port Philip Bay, from the direction of Bass Strait. When it reached a position about halfway across the bay, between the observers on the Frankston beach and Williamstown on the opposite shore, the UFO flashed a brilliant white ray of light. Following this event a smaller red light was noted to have detached itself from the larger object. As the large UFO sped away to the north, the smaller red one flew at a much slower speed toward the beach where the observers were standing. As the smaller object approached the beach, the nine people observed that the object was shaped like a star-fish with red lights at each tip. They could also hear a low humming sound as it flew nearby. When the red lighted UFO was a mile or so past the group, it stopped in mid air for a few minutes. It then accelerated away at a much faster speed in the direction of Bass Strait where the larger lighted object had first appeared.
One of the best indications from observers that a UFO was involved in Frederick's experience came a few years after the event when four witnesses came forward to report sighting both the aircraft and the UFO flying directly above the Cessna. They had hesitated reporting outside their immediate friends because of fear of ridicule. They came forward when they did because the information bore on their conscience.
An uncle, his son and two nieces were rabbit hunting at Cape Otway. A niece looked up and saw the green light and called to her uncle, "What is that light?" The uncle looked up and answered, "An aeroplane light". The niece then said, "No, the light above the aeroplane". Frederick was the only pilot flying in the area at that time. Sight of the aeroplane and object was lost when they flew behind the hills. This sighting completely rules out all speculations and fictitious stories - other than that a UFO was involved in the pilot's disappearance.
CONCLUSIONS
The Frederick Valentich encounter provides an excellent case for study. It is an incident that can be compared with several other encounters where objects have revealed similar characteristics such as magnetic effects, ignition failure as well as communication failures etc. There is no doubt in my mind that the disappearance of Frederick Valentich and his Cessna was caused by a UFO. 1 do not know whether he went up, down or was disintegrated. The electromagnetic effect from the UFO may have stalled his engine (since he did report the engine was rough-idling or "coughing") and caused him to crash into the water. There is also the possibility that the mystery sound which ended the transmission between Melbourne Flight Service and the pilot was the sound of his aircraft in the early stages of disintegration. Another possibility is that his radio frequency may have been jammed deliberately by persons or entities.
REFERENCES
1. Australian UFO Bulletin: Victorian UFO Research Society (VUFORS)
P.O. Box 1043, Moorabbin, Victoria 3189, Australia.
2. International UFO Reporter:
J. Allen Hynek Center for UFO Studies, 2457 West Peterson Ave., Chicago, Illinois 60659, USA
3. Melbourne Episode: Case study of a missing pilot,
Dr Richard F. Haines, L.D.A. Press, Los Altos, California, 1987
4. MUFON UFO Journal:
Mutual UFO Network, Inc., 103 Oldtowne Road, Seguin, Texas 78155, USA
5. "The Bass Strait Flap":
Norman, Paul, Australian UFO Bulletin, December 1978 and 1979,Bulletins.
6. "Mystery Deepens in Pilot Disappearance Case",
Norman, Paul, MUFON UFO Journal, No. 141, November 1979, pp.5-7.
7. "Frederick Valentich Encounter Update":
Norman, Paul, BUFORA BULLETIN, June 1983: British UFO Research Association(BUFORA), 40 Jones Drive, Whittlesey, Peterborough, PE7 2HW, England
8. "Pilot Valentich, Death or Abduction?",
VUFORS Committee: The Australian Annual Flying Saucer Review: 1981 edition published by VUFORS.
SeitenanfangVorheriger BeitragNächster BeitragSeitenende Link zu diesem Beitrag

Harald

Bewertung: -
Abstimmungen: 0 (Abstimmen!)

Veröffentlicht am Montag, 17. Juni 2002 - 09:18 Uhr:   Beitrag editierenBeitrag löschenSchnellansichtBeitrag drucken   Beitrag verschieben (Nur für Moderatoren)

Beachten Sie bitte die folgende Passage:

"An uncle, his son and two nieces were rabbit hunting at Cape Otway. A niece looked up and saw the green light and called to her uncle, "What is that light?" The uncle looked up and answered, "An aeroplane light". The niece then said, "No, the light above the aeroplane". Frederick was the only pilot flying in the area at that time. Sight of the aeroplane and object was lost when they flew behind the hills."

auf Deutsch übersetzt:

"Ein Onkel, sein Sohn und zwei Nichten waren auf der Kaninchenjagd bei Cape Otway.
Eine Nichte schaute nach oben und sah das grüne Licht und fragte ihren Onkel, "Was ist das für ein Licht?"
Der Onkel sah nach oben und antwortete, "das Licht von einen Flugzeug".
Die Nichte sagte dann, "nein, ich meine das Licht über den Flugzeug".
Frederick war der einzige Pilot, der zu diesen Zeitpunkt in diesem Gebiet flog."


Wenn man sich einmal überlegt, daß ich den Link auf oben genannten Artikel nach einer e - Mail Anfrage von der Flugsicherung in Melbourne
zugeschickt bekommen habe, darf man davon ausgehen, daß hier absolut kein Fake vorliegt!

Themenbereiche | Letzter Tag | Letzte Woche | Explorer-Ansicht | Suche | Benutzerliste | Hilfe/Anleitungen | Lizenz Admin