[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: (meteorobs) TWA800 and meteors
From Lloyd,
>Of great importance. How are you going to discount approx. 200 witensses who
>saw this streak of light near and/or hit the aircraft? Are you going to
>ignore them ? I CAN'T.
>
I can't either, but the authorities appear to be doing so. Even the reports
of other pilots aren't being used, instead they are silenced. If the
object curved even moderately, the meteor theory is dead. Meteors hardly
have a mechanism to cause a curve. Consider the force needed to curve
something going minimally 5 miles/second.
The popular idea that meteors continue to be visible down to very low
altitudes just won't go away. I can't accept any notion that one would
still be glowing at less than 3 miles up. Previous discussion should have
laid that to rest. So far I haven't heard of anyone knowledgeable about
astronomy having seen this object. If I had seen it myself, I would have
known the difference immediately. Meteors and missiles don't look the same
: I have seen a good many launches from Florida since 1960.
What is the basis for discounting the missile hit? I haven't seen anything
discussed here about this yet. The word of the principal investigators
alone will not suffice. That is the biggest problem we are facing. The
usual "news" sources are worthless, for they only serve out disinformation
and cover stories.
I stand corrected on the time of day/night. The photo of the missile showed
a bright twilight sky background, obviously too bright for stars to be out.
Mr. Sanders received the seat material with exhaust residue from one of his
sources. It was analyzed by a company named in his book, and the elements
found point directly at just one conclusion. Efforts expended at rounding
up all incriminating evidence means there is something to hide.
>
>I am an amateur astronomer. I did make my own 6.0 inch reflecting telescope,
>I ground my own lens and made my own Foucault tester which they should have
>used to test the Hubble. I have always been interested in meteors. but as
>Will Rogers said: "Everyboby is ignorant, only on different subjects"
>
This being a reflector, it would have a primary mirror instead of a lens.
Regards to Lloyd.