"... Effort to Alter the Public's Perceptions ..."

In article 1sbTa.25198$zy.17557@fed1read06,
says...
"Elysium Fossa" wrote in message
...

..."the Kirtland photo could indicate a flow disturbance on the leading
edge
of the left wing and/or flow leaving the leading edge of the left wing
(see
Figure 5-48).... It also appears to show a disturbed flow leaving the
trailing edge of the left wing. Other images, not shown here, also show
disturbed flow on the upper side of the left wing, indicating that the
damage and venting through the upper RCC vent was deflecting the flow
upward.


I was surprised when I read that part of the report too, I wonder what
pictures they were referring to, and who and what acquired them
considering
they refer to the upper side of the left wing.

My post goes back to just after the Kirtland Starfire photo story came out.
I was told by multiple independent sources that there was more footage shot
than NASA is admitting too, but it was shot from Nevada at a classifed
location, FWIW. In the report, it is not clear if they are admitting to
more Starfire photos or something else entirely....

In one of the last NASA news conferences on Columbia before CAIB took
over the PR function entirely, one of the NASA spokesmen spoke of the
Kirtland photo, saying specifically that (quoting from memory) "none of
the other images or films from this source show anything more conclusive
than what you've seen." He said this with something of an air of
defiance, as if he was damn well going to tell the truth regardless of
what he'd been told to say (and not to say) about the Kirtland imaging.

That pretty much nailed it down for me.

--

It's not the pace of life I mind; | Doug Van Dorn
it's the sudden stop at the end... |

"Doug..." wrote in message
...

In one of the last NASA news conferences on Columbia before CAIB took
over the PR function entirely, one of the NASA spokesmen spoke of the
Kirtland photo, saying specifically that (quoting from memory) "none of
the other images or films from this source show anything more conclusive
than what you've seen." He said this with something of an air of
defiance, as if he was damn well going to tell the truth regardless of
what he'd been told to say (and not to say) about the Kirtland imaging.

If the CAIB had not revealed in its report that those other photos existed
and showed more data, I wonder where we would be now. I wonder if the CAIB
released that information just to get Congress to ask about them. That way
Congress will have to open that door of what sounds like new and possibly
embarrassing details we have not yet seen. It will be interesting to see
how long the sleeping news media will take to notice. I don't have much
respect for them anymore.

That pretty much nailed it down for me.

I know what you mean.

--

Daniel
Mount Charleston, not Charleston, SC