When Will They Land?!?

http://rense.com/Datapages/mystmachinedata.htm

I'm voting for them to land next week, before WWW3.

What do you think?

Shall we ask them?

On May 10, 7:26 pm, www.freedomtofascism.com wrote:
http://rense.com/Datapages/mystmachinedata.htm

I'm voting for them to land next week, before WWW3.

What do you think?

Shall we ask them?

We could use a pair of our ABLs to ask nicely via laser cannon beam.

100 megawatts of CW beam energy covering a +/- 4 km shaky diameter of
surface target area should get their attention.
.. - Brad Guth

On Sat, 10 May 2008 19:46:22 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth
wrote:

On May 10, 7:26 pm, www.freedomtofascism.com wrote:
http://rense.com/Datapages/mystmachinedata.htm

I'm voting for them to land next week, before WWW3.

What do you think?

Shall we ask them?

We could use a pair of our ABLs to ask nicely via laser cannon beam.

Yummie, energy. They like that.

100 megawatts of CW beam energy covering a +/- 4 km shaky diameter of
surface target area should get their attention.

More energy. They will multiply faster!

So shall we invite them for dinner to feast on your weaponry?!?

On May 10, 7:57 pm, www.freedomtofascism.com wrote:
On Sat, 10 May 2008 19:46:22 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth
wrote:

On May 10, 7:26 wrote:
http://rense.com/Datapages/mystmachinedata.htm

I'm voting for them to land next week, before WWW3.

What do you think?

Shall we ask them?

We could use a pair of our ABLs to ask nicely via laser cannon beam.

Yummie, energy. They like that.

100 megawatts of CW beam energy covering a +/- 4 km shaky diameter of
surface target area should get their attention.

More energy. They will multiply faster!

So shall we invite them for dinner to feast on your weaponry?!?

At that distance it's not a weapon, just a damn bright amount of IR
that couldn't hurt an ET flea.

A 4 km diameter illuminated area is 12.57 m2

100e6/12.57e6 = 7.955 watts/m2

Shaking that +/- 2 km in all directions might cut it's average
intensity by half. In other words, less than 4 watt/m2 of IR energy
isn't exactly going to outperform what our sun has to offer, although
a few ABL shots delivered while the moon is in earthshine should be
impressive (hard for an ET to ignore).
.. - Brad Guth

On Sat, 10 May 2008 20:12:26 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth
wrote:

On May 10, 7:57 pm, www.freedomtofascism.com wrote:
On Sat, 10 May 2008 19:46:22 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth
wrote:

On May 10, 7:26 wrote:
http://rense.com/Datapages/mystmachinedata.htm

I'm voting for them to land next week, before WWW3.

What do you think?

Shall we ask them?

We could use a pair of our ABLs to ask nicely via laser cannon beam.

Yummie, energy. They like that.

100 megawatts of CW beam energy covering a +/- 4 km shaky diameter of
surface target area should get their attention.

More energy. They will multiply faster!

So shall we invite them for dinner to feast on your weaponry?!?

At that distance it's not a weapon, just a damn bright amount of IR
that couldn't hurt an ET flea.

A 4 km diameter illuminated area is 12.57 m2

100e6/12.57e6 = 7.955 watts/m2

Shaking that +/- 2 km in all directions might cut it's average
intensity by half. In other words, less than 4 watt/m2 of IR energy
isn't exactly going to outperform what our sun has to offer, although
a few ABL shots delivered while the moon is in earthshine should be
impressive (hard for an ET to ignore).

You're expending a lot of energy. They like that.

On May 10, 8:24 pm, www.freedomtofascism.com wrote:
On Sat, 10 May 2008 20:12:26 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth
wrote:



On May 10, 7:57 wrote:
On Sat, 10 May 2008 19:46:22 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth
wrote:

On May 10, 7:26 wrote:
http://rense.com/Datapages/mystmachinedata.htm

I'm voting for them to land next week, before WWW3.

What do you think?

Shall we ask them?

We could use a pair of our ABLs to ask nicely via laser cannon beam.

Yummie, energy. They like that.

100 megawatts of CW beam energy covering a +/- 4 km shaky diameter of
surface target area should get their attention.

More energy. They will multiply faster!

So shall we invite them for dinner to feast on your weaponry?!?

At that distance it's not a weapon, just a damn bright amount of IR
that couldn't hurt an ET flea.

A 4 km diameter illuminated area is 12.57 m2

100e6/12.57e6 = 7.955 watts/m2

Shaking that +/- 2 km in all directions might cut it's average
intensity by half. In other words, less than 4 watt/m2 of IR energy
isn't exactly going to outperform what our sun has to offer, although
a few ABL shots delivered while the moon is in earthshine should be
impressive (hard for an ET to ignore).

You're expending a lot of energy. They like that.

It's a good and relatively safe use of terrestrial ABL energy, unless
we end up blinding them ETs.
.. - Brad Guth

On Sat, 10 May 2008 20:24:19 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth
wrote:

On May 10, 8:24 pm, www.freedomtofascism.com wrote:
On Sat, 10 May 2008 20:12:26 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth
wrote:



On May 10, 7:57 wrote:
On Sat, 10 May 2008 19:46:22 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth
wrote:

On May 10, 7:26 wrote:
http://rense.com/Datapages/mystmachinedata.htm

I'm voting for them to land next week, before WWW3.

What do you think?

Shall we ask them?

We could use a pair of our ABLs to ask nicely via laser cannon beam.

Yummie, energy. They like that.

100 megawatts of CW beam energy covering a +/- 4 km shaky diameter of
surface target area should get their attention.

More energy. They will multiply faster!

So shall we invite them for dinner to feast on your weaponry?!?

At that distance it's not a weapon, just a damn bright amount of IR
that couldn't hurt an ET flea.

A 4 km diameter illuminated area is 12.57 m2

100e6/12.57e6 = 7.955 watts/m2

Shaking that +/- 2 km in all directions might cut it's average
intensity by half. In other words, less than 4 watt/m2 of IR energy
isn't exactly going to outperform what our sun has to offer, although
a few ABL shots delivered while the moon is in earthshine should be
impressive (hard for an ET to ignore).

You're expending a lot of energy. They like that.

It's a good and relatively safe use of terrestrial ABL energy, unless
we end up blinding them ETs.

You can't blind them. They don't have eyes. They're silicon life forms.

On May 10, 8:36 pm, www.freedomtofascism.com wrote:
On Sat, 10 May 2008 20:24:19 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth
wrote:



On May 10, 8:24 wrote:
On Sat, 10 May 2008 20:12:26 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth
wrote:

On May 10, 7:57 wrote:
On Sat, 10 May 2008 19:46:22 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth
wrote:

On May 10, 7:26 wrote:
http://rense.com/Datapages/mystmachinedata.htm

I'm voting for them to land next week, before WWW3.

What do you think?

Shall we ask them?

We could use a pair of our ABLs to ask nicely via laser cannon beam.

Yummie, energy. They like that.

100 megawatts of CW beam energy covering a +/- 4 km shaky diameter of
surface target area should get their attention.

More energy. They will multiply faster!

So shall we invite them for dinner to feast on your weaponry?!?

At that distance it's not a weapon, just a damn bright amount of IR
that couldn't hurt an ET flea.

A 4 km diameter illuminated area is 12.57 m2

100e6/12.57e6 = 7.955 watts/m2

Shaking that +/- 2 km in all directions might cut it's average
intensity by half. In other words, less than 4 watt/m2 of IR energy
isn't exactly going to outperform what our sun has to offer, although
a few ABL shots delivered while the moon is in earthshine should be
impressive (hard for an ET to ignore).

You're expending a lot of energy. They like that.

It's a good and relatively safe use of terrestrial ABL energy, unless
we end up blinding them ETs.

You can't blind them. They don't have eyes. They're silicon life forms.

Then we're not going to **** them off any more than they already are.
.. - Brad Guth

On Sat, 10 May 2008 20:37:34 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth
wrote:

On May 10, 8:36 pm, www.freedomtofascism.com wrote:
On Sat, 10 May 2008 20:24:19 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth
wrote:



On May 10, 8:24 wrote:
On Sat, 10 May 2008 20:12:26 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth
wrote:

On May 10, 7:57 wrote:
On Sat, 10 May 2008 19:46:22 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth
wrote:

On May 10, 7:26 wrote:
http://rense.com/Datapages/mystmachinedata.htm

I'm voting for them to land next week, before WWW3.

What do you think?

Shall we ask them?

We could use a pair of our ABLs to ask nicely via laser cannon beam.

Yummie, energy. They like that.

100 megawatts of CW beam energy covering a +/- 4 km shaky diameter of
surface target area should get their attention.

More energy. They will multiply faster!

So shall we invite them for dinner to feast on your weaponry?!?

At that distance it's not a weapon, just a damn bright amount of IR
that couldn't hurt an ET flea.

A 4 km diameter illuminated area is 12.57 m2

100e6/12.57e6 = 7.955 watts/m2

Shaking that +/- 2 km in all directions might cut it's average
intensity by half. In other words, less than 4 watt/m2 of IR energy
isn't exactly going to outperform what our sun has to offer, although
a few ABL shots delivered while the moon is in earthshine should be
impressive (hard for an ET to ignore).

You're expending a lot of energy. They like that.

It's a good and relatively safe use of terrestrial ABL energy, unless
we end up blinding them ETs.

You can't blind them. They don't have eyes. They're silicon life forms.

Then we're not going to **** them off any more than they already are.

They don't have human emotions.

www.freedomtofascism.com wrote:
On Sat, 10 May 2008 20:37:34 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth
wrote:

On May 10, 8:36 pm, www.freedomtofascism.com wrote:
On Sat, 10 May 2008 20:24:19 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth
wrote:



On May 10, 8:24 wrote:
On Sat, 10 May 2008 20:12:26 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth
wrote:

On May 10, 7:57 wrote:
On Sat, 10 May 2008 19:46:22 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth
wrote:

On May 10, 7:26 wrote:
http://rense.com/Datapages/mystmachinedata.htm

I'm voting for them to land next week, before WWW3.

What do you think?

Shall we ask them?

We could use a pair of our ABLs to ask nicely via laser cannon beam.

Yummie, energy. They like that.

100 megawatts of CW beam energy covering a +/- 4 km shaky diameter of
surface target area should get their attention.

More energy. They will multiply faster!

So shall we invite them for dinner to feast on your weaponry?!?

At that distance it's not a weapon, just a damn bright amount of IR
that couldn't hurt an ET flea.

A 4 km diameter illuminated area is 12.57 m2

100e6/12.57e6 = 7.955 watts/m2

Shaking that +/- 2 km in all directions might cut it's average
intensity by half. In other words, less than 4 watt/m2 of IR energy
isn't exactly going to outperform what our sun has to offer, although
a few ABL shots delivered while the moon is in earthshine should be
impressive (hard for an ET to ignore).

You're expending a lot of energy. They like that.

It's a good and relatively safe use of terrestrial ABL energy, unless
we end up blinding them ETs.

You can't blind them. They don't have eyes. They're silicon life forms.

Then we're not going to **** them off any more than they already are.

They don't have human emotions.

They promote communism?

Do they eat apple pie?

Can they even survive in this continuum?
--
ah