|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
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? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
When Will They Land?!?
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 |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
When Will They Land?!?
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?!? |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
When Will They Land?!?
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 |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
When Will They Land?!?
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. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
When Will They Land?!?
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 |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
When Will They Land?!?
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. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
When Will They Land?!?
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 |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
When Will They Land?!?
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. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
When Will They Land?!?
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 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Did you know you can buy land on the moon? | Morris | Misc | 10 | December 2nd 03 02:48 AM |
Did you know you can buy land on the moon? | Morris | Amateur Astronomy | 5 | December 1st 03 04:56 AM |
A new Rock to land on! | Private Account | Solar | 0 | September 7th 03 03:54 AM |
We *did* land on moon | Greg Goodwin | Misc | 4 | August 14th 03 01:46 PM |
We *did* land on moon | Steve Dufour | Misc | 54 | August 8th 03 02:04 PM |