I WANT MY ANTI-GRAVITIC PROPULSION SYSTEM!

by boomerang (0 articles, 7 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 556 comments [215 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Tuesday, Feb 26, 2008 at 8:50:03 AM

  (0+)

Any idea can be patented but that does not mean it will work.  Do you have evidence of an actual ship that has been constructed and can fly??

by John Brown (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 15 comments) on Tuesday, Feb 26, 2008 at 9:03:10 AM

  (0+)

The patent office, in my researches, has required patent applicants to provide working prototypes when “extraordinary claims” are made by the applicants.  See United States Code Title 35 Section 114.

by Luke Fortune (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 10 comments) on Tuesday, Feb 26, 2008 at 10:17:09 AM

  (0+)

The applicant is sometimes required to furnish a “model of convenient size” not a full size working ship.

The key words are the “Director may”.

The model is only required to get a conception.

Most likely patent applicants were not even required to submit a model.

I don’t believe the issue relates to paragraph 2 on composition of matter.

Below for your reference is the code section in whole.

CHAPTER 11—APPLICATION FOR PATENT

§ 114. Models, specimens

The Director may require the applicant to furnish a model of convenient size to exhibit advantageously the several parts of his invention.

When the invention relates to a composition of matter, the Director may require the applicant to furnish specimens or ingredients for the purpose of inspection or experiment.  

by John Brown (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 15 comments) on Tuesday, Feb 26, 2008 at 12:33:14 PM

  (0+)

How would you explain the increase in UFO sightings? 

Occam's Razor is helpful in this instance...

Thousands of pages of patents that explain what we're seeing for at least the last 100 years

or

Aliens

The simplest explanation is usually the correct one.

 I recall the inventor that is trying to patent a "wormhole generator" has been asked to provide a working model before a patent will be issued.  Why would someone claiming to have a flying saucer be treated any different?

by John Novak (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 3 comments) on Tuesday, Feb 26, 2008 at 4:10:11 PM

  (0+)

Your are correct that the simplest explanation is usually the correct one. But not always so it is not a valid point to argue.

If these are earth based humans flying around in faster than light ships hiding that kind of technology from us and doing it for a 100 years or more. Man what an operation that would be… That is even more spectacular than ETs visiting us. 

If the patent office issued a patent and required a working model Mr. Fortune being the author and researcher he is alleged to be, should be able to tell us if a working model was provided.

Also, the patent office has only recently made their standards harder.  Years ago there was no model requirement.

by John Brown (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 15 comments) on Tuesday, Feb 26, 2008 at 5:53:35 PM

  (0+)

Way to use the code cite I provided you. 

Everyone knows that the Army is upfront and open about UFO technology, right Officer Roswell?

by Luke Fortune (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 10 comments) on Tuesday, Feb 26, 2008 at 5:34:33 PM

  (0+)

What do you mean...Why am I using your cite.  The answer is because you used it. That is how a argument works.  I am saying you are right and further explaining the cite. 

And let me say I am not attacking you.  I have looked at your web site and have high regard for your efforts.  You may be right.  But from my position your view does not seem to be correct on all points. 

Saying that the UFO disclosure is over because you found patents of flying saucers or their technology is not valid.

It is public knowledge that flying saucers have been constructed and have been flown.  I am not arguing that.  I am sure that whoever built them would have gotten patents.  No problem with that. The ones patented are not capable of doing what we see flying around.

I think it is likely that a secret government is flying around right now in them and maybe some private owners or corporations.

Saying that over 100 years ago earth based humans patented what we are seeing in our skies right now is a stretch and wrong. 

Saying that there is no evidence of real ETs is also just plan wrong.  You may have looked through a bunch of patents but you have not looked into the UFO and ET phenomena if you believe that.

My email is fields@gator.net

by John Brown (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 15 comments) on Tuesday, Feb 26, 2008 at 6:31:41 PM

  (0+)

"The ones patented are not capable of doing what we see flying around."

Sorry friend, you are grossly in error.  Glowing balls of light that are invisible to radar, speeds well in excess of what jet fighters are capable of, apparently impossible right angle maneuvering, these are patented and now PUBLIC DOMAIN technologies.

"Saying that over 100 years ago earth based humans patented what we are seeing in our skies right now is a stretch and wrong."

For a start, I didn't say OVER 100 years, I index the last 100 years available from the patent office in my books.  And again,  unfortunately you are grossly in error--not my opinion, the info from the patent office shows your error. 

The fact that you are unfamiliar with the technology doesn't mean it hasn't been created, built, and patented.  It is not your fault that you are unfamiliar with this technology.  It is your fault that you make these arguments without doing your homework.  Ignorance is curable with education.  You have a strong passion, and a sharp mind, I'm sure.  If you would get up to speed, you could be a strong force in helping move our society into the 21st century, instead of arguing for 20th century mental limitation. 

by Luke Fortune (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 10 comments) on Tuesday, Feb 26, 2008 at 6:46:19 PM

  (0+)

You did not address my major issue.

Saying that there is no evidence of real ETs is just plan wrong and I will use your own words because they are good.  “It is your fault that you make these arguments without doing your homework. Ignorance is curable with education…… You have a strong passion, and a sharp mind, I'm sure.”

“If you would get up to speed, you could be a strong force in helping move our society” into a full disclosure of Extraterrestrials are their true reality.

Also I don’t understand how you can definitive state how a given technology will perform by looking at the patent.  You would really need to see a working prototype to make the kind of statements you have made.

I do believe I understand the technology.  What it looks like you are doing is believing that what you see in the air is what is patented and even if you are correct you do not have the proof. 

by John Brown (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 15 comments) on Tuesday, Feb 26, 2008 at 7:09:38 PM

  (0+)

For claiming to be simply a paralegal and only 9 years under your belt research wise, I think I'll wait until one of the more renowned researchers (such as that of Stanton Friedman) put their two-cents in first.  I've seen get rich schemes before so I'm gun shy, especially when they claim to have all of the answers to Ufology's most unanswered questions.

Your presentation doesn't scream, HEY! I FOUND IT, I HAVE THE ANSWERS, or something of that nature. Instead, it screams BUY ME! I'm not one to get all fired up.

Lastly, the website name is UFO How-To. How to what? You left the most important word(s) out of the website title. Is that the paralegal in you?

by Alien Casebook (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 18 comments) on Tuesday, Feb 26, 2008 at 11:24:52 AM

  (0+)

You think he's a credible researcher? He takes other people's research, then calls it his. I have a particular bone to pick with that charlatan over roswell 1947. I discovered the name of the pilot who flew the remains of the crashed ship back to wright field. Friedman took credit for my legwork. He is not a person of honor by any stretch of the imagination.

by Cinderfella (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 248 comments [95 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Feb 26, 2008 at 1:22:14 PM

  (0+)

If this is true, then you won't mind giving us your name so that this can be verified. I have never heard of such a claim and as far as I'm concerned, Stanton Friedman is the Crème de la Crème of Ufologists.

by Alien Casebook (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 18 comments) on Tuesday, Feb 26, 2008 at 2:22:39 PM

  (0+)

Leonard Stringfield did more real research than anyone. Read about his crash and retrievals. And I don't give out my name. Once you get too close to the truth you only get in trouble. "Some fishermen of the day are the evils thereof." Friedman is a copy cat, deceitful, and takes credit for things that aren't his. My work has already been published. Friedman took it and called it his. His credibility is close to zero in my book.

by Cinderfella (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 248 comments [95 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Feb 26, 2008 at 3:20:05 PM

  (0+)

Friedman is a great researcher with a tremendous amount of conviction and he's not here to defend himself so maybe you ought not repeat what you can't produce.

To quote a great man who stood up and represented the UFO Community while making us all look FANTASTIC and not like the  bunch of kooks that most think we are" I have no patience for nasty, noisy negativists".

by Alien Casebook (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 18 comments) on Tuesday, Feb 26, 2008 at 5:44:32 PM

  (0+)

You really don't know what you are talking about. Read my suggestion. I've done my homework, obviously you haven't. I won't waste any more time, I've got better things to do. I spent an entire decade doing research/interviews, esp crash/retrievals and alien contact. I went underground as a result. Friedman stands tall because he's got nothing to lose for using other people's work. He's just along for the ride, some notoriety, and his 15 minutes of infamy. Don't judge a person until you've walked in their shoes.

by Cinderfella (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 248 comments [95 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Feb 27, 2008 at 1:56:36 AM

  (0+)

No.  I titled it "UFO How-To" because a title like "DIY UFO" would have been
implying that you could go to the hardware store and buy parts off the shelf to snap together like it was a kitchen remodel or engine rebuild.  Not the case.

"How-To" is an indication of general knowledge.  The "UFO How-To" series is an encyclopedic chronicling as recorded by the patent office of the UFO inventors and the 6 main subcategories of UFO propulsion systems that their inventions are categorized under herein .

That's why the books are titled and organized the way they are.  So that people can benefit from the time and effort I've put into finding, organizing, and presenting the replicable evidence.

Instead of inciting baseless propoganda of "these books could be fraud," you could get educated on the topic.  Or would that take too much of your time?

Ultimately people want to know two questions:

      1) Do we possess UFO crafts/technology?

      2) If not, are they extra-terrestrial?

In the UFO How-To" series, I answer the first question with a "YES."

In the pages of the UFO How-To" series, I relate the inventors and their inventions
that explain how to build craft that do exactly what people are seeing, photographing, and video recording.

You want to know how a craft can be a glowing ball of light that's invisible to radar?  The answer is in the books, was patented clearly and openly in the 1960's, and you can replicate it too. 

Do you want to understand the technology patented in 1971 that creates a field that nullifies gravity and inertia for craft pilots?  The answer is in the books and you can replicate it too.

Do you want to understand the technology patented in the 1920's (and up, over and over) that can make a wingless craft fly under the power and direct effect of high voltages of electricity directly interfacing with its hull?  The answer is in the books and you can replicate it too.

I do not address the second question in my books at all.  You are free with me to believe whatever you want.  I am not a debunker.  I do not write about aliens, I leave the topic arena at the propulsion systems level, that we possess and are capable of building.

None of these books are threatening your belief in aliens.

Not I, nor anyone who works with me is challenging the existence of extra-terrestrial life.  I do not address that topic in these books.  These books are about UFO technology that you can replicate, because even though the craft look other-worldly, 3400+ pages of that evidence was provided by people from this planet.

Regards,

by Luke Fortune (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 10 comments) on Friday, Feb 29, 2008 at 1:19:54 PM

  (0+)

To conclude that all UFO’s, as you seem to imply, can be neatly explained away by human technological patents and engineering activity is about a thousand times MORE preposterous than the theory that the inexplicable craft in our skies come from other places in our universe. It’s nothing more than human ignorance and close-minded arrogance that desperately needs to believe we are perfectly alone, a fluke of the universe, and therefore supremely special. What is it? Genuine open-mindedness, you think? A feeling of being threatened? A fear we might not be everything we crack ourselves up to be? Your assumptions also insult and discredit thousands of responsible eyewitnesses, who KNOW for the greater part that what they witnessed - and/or came into direct contact with - are not of human origin. Wake up! The universe is virtually teeming with life, and much of it is older, wiser and considerably more peaceful than we are.

by Marcus Hunt (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 3 comments) on Tuesday, Feb 26, 2008 at 2:34:24 PM

  (0+)

Where does the author state he believes we are alone in the universe? 

Eyewitnesses see craft in the sky.  Not the pilots.  People who say aliens are responsible have no credible evidence other than heresay.  Keeping the technology in the 'x-files' unless it has a alien stamp of approval only aids in keeping the information out of the hands of the general public.

Why don't we build the craft and ask alien questions after?  That's more or less what I get from all this.

 He's proven his theory with an encyclopedia set full of facts.  Can you prove aliens?

by John Novak (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 3 comments) on Tuesday, Feb 26, 2008 at 4:00:23 PM

  (0+)

You are correct eyewitnesses see crafts in the sky and not the pilots.

But people have seen the pilots and say they are aliens.  There is credible evidence.  A great deal of evidence.

When someone says they saw alien bodies that is not hearsay.

When someone says they interacted with live aliens that is not hearsay.

Hearsay is when someone tells a story of what they heard someone else say.

But for the record, hearsay is still credible evidence and admitable in court. Not always, but very often.  

by John Brown (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 15 comments) on Tuesday, Feb 26, 2008 at 6:44:36 PM

  (0+)

but you beat me to making this point.

I have no doubt that mankind may have already developed, is trying to develope, or has the capabilty to develop in the future, an aircraft that maneuvers like an UFO is reported to do.  But I can't for one minute assume that all unexplained aircraft and submersible/flying machines are of human creation. 

If we were producing all the them, someone from some factory somewhere would have surely stolen one, put out a youtube video, gone to the press, gabbed on myspace about it, told the spouse who told the friend, etc.  That kind of technology would not remain secret for long.    

by Angela Zayak (8 articles, 0 quicklinks, 6 diaries, 36 comments) on Tuesday, Feb 26, 2008 at 6:02:47 PM

  (0+)

So Marcus, did you even read the article before posting your comment?

 "... See the Temple of Ea in Sumeria (now Iraq) as an example (Where else do you see a creator god making the race of man in a beaker, associated with the double helix, in ancient stone reliefs?)."

Did you gather that Ea was one of those "from heaven sent?"

Where did you see me printing anywhere that "we are perfectly alone, a fluke of the universe..."

I look forward to your book indexing the teeming life of the universe, especially those races that are "older, wiser and considerably more peaceful than we are."  I, and I suspect the bulk of the planet's population, aren't familiar with those extra-terrestrial species yet.

You might want to get your facts straight before you pick a fight next time.  You could make allies out of people instead of isolating yourself.

by Luke Fortune (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 10 comments) on Tuesday, Feb 26, 2008 at 6:32:22 PM

  (0+)

Well, Luke, I read enough to get the gist of it. Indeed, it’s true you don’t directly state, “we are perfectly alone, a fluke of the universe” - but it’s significantly implied. Why else would you have done all that research?

And I’m familiar with the legend of “Ea.” According to Middle Eastern mythology, Ea hailed from the land of “Gad,” which, interesting enough, is the linguistic root of the modern expression, “Egads!”

Regarding proving anything, (about anything), to anyone else - it isn’t necessary. I choose not to play by the arbitrary “rule” that says “it has to be proven” - or it’s hogwash. The only person you can prove anything to is yourself - if you’re interested - and that’s the only thing that really matters. As for me, I’m relatively comfortable with my general understanding of  the transportation vehicles our friends and helpers residing in the next finer density or dimension of matter utilize to go about from one place to another - and not to mention, gradually introduce themselves to us.

by Marcus Hunt (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 3 comments) on Wednesday, Feb 27, 2008 at 3:54:38 PM

  (0+)

"Why else would you have done all that research?"

1) Because people deserve to know the truth that we possess, and have possessed, "UFO" technologies for the last century;

2) Because we deserve to have the 'futuristic' life that we've been promised since we were kids by governmental agencies and the media;

3) Because the ability to improve the global economy and quality of life for everyone on the planet is contained therein.

4) Do you need more reasons?

by Luke Fortune (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 10 comments) on Wednesday, Feb 27, 2008 at 11:20:40 PM

  (0+)

1. Which is of relatively small significance, compared to knowing the truth that there are advanced extraterrestrial civilizations who have been helping us evolve for centuries, and who are now undertaking the wise, brotherly and gradual process of revealing their existence to us on a conscious level.

2. Lasting human fulfillment, happiness and enlightenment only come from within, and these things are not related to how advanced or “futuristic” whatever technological advances a society has made. This has always been true.

3.  The “the ability to improve the global economy and quality of life for everyone on the planet is contained" in the ability of mankind as a whole to raise its collective consciousness and spontaneously treat each other according to the Golden Rule, “Love thy neighbor as thyself,” individually, corporately, culturally and governmentally. Simple as that.

4.  I don’t need any reasons! That’s a consideration for only yourself. But the issues you’ve raised, and the discussion you’ve generated are both interesting and very worthwhile.

by Marcus Hunt (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 3 comments) on Friday, Feb 29, 2008 at 11:14:54 PM

  (0+)

In the Spring of 2004 Dr. Mallove announced to the world that we were only a few months away from unlimited clean heat and electricity. He was murdered shortly thereafter.

The decision was made long ago by our predator elite to do their best to keep the mass of the human race cold, hungry and dirty as long as possible and before the mass responds to this “Selective Strategy,” use nuclear weapons on the human race and shut us all up once and for all. This is why ET is here.

General Electric is still building nuclear weapons to kill us all. The people at GE are known as the “Electric Nuts” and they are in what is euphemistically known as the department of  “Population reduction technology.”

Gabriel Kron built-by accident-an over unity circuit back in 1963.GE took his circuit and placed it into a ‘Secret’ patent, where it is until this day.

The decision was made to exterminate us, we are the Living Dead, and they have no plans on changing and selecting a new strategy; a strategy of Peace. Our nuclear war fighting elite cannot now tell you all that they have wanted to destroy you, and have pulled the nuclear ‘Trigger’ on you all, many times over the decades.. They are concerned on how you may react to such dreadful news.

by Patrick (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 519 comments [22 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Feb 26, 2008 at 6:38:16 PM

  (0+)

The hoops I had to jump through just to post a simple comment!! I mean REALLY!

First, thx for digging up all these patents, it is very intruiging. I have long thought we are not being told much about what is know/possible.

But I will say...haven't things been seen for hundreds, indeed, thousands of years?

Eygpt, 22 A.D. Egyptians during the reign of Thutmose III were witness to the landing of a "circle of fire." The craft was "one rod long and one rod wide." After a time, the ship shot back up into the sky.

England 1290 A.D. An ancient manuscript found in Byland Abbey and belonging to the ancestors of Henry, the Abbott, reads, "There was a great portent outside. A large round silver thing like a disc flew slowly over them and excited the greatest terror." People, partaking in the feast commemorating the Saints of Simon and Jude, rushed out into the night to witness this mysterious phenomenon.

 Windsor Castle 1783  "Northeast of the Terrace, in clear sky and warm weather, I saw appear suddenly an oblong cloud nearly parallel to the horizon. Below the cloud was seen a luminous body, brightly lit up and almost stationary... This strange ball at first appeared bluish and faint, but its light increased, and it soon began to move. At first, it ascended above the horizon, obliquely toward the east. Then it changed its direction and moved parallel to the horizon. It vanished in the southeast. I saw it for half a minute, and the light it gave out was prodigious. It lit up every object on the face of the country. It changed shape to oblong, acquired a tail, and seemed to split up into two bodies of small size. About two minutes later came a rumble like an explosion," wrote Tiberius Cavallo, Fellow of the Royal Society, in his memoirs.

Not trying to argue with anyone, just wanted to add my 2 cents.

by noneof yourbuisness (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 1 comments) on Tuesday, Feb 26, 2008 at 8:47:00 PM

  (0+)

by Luke Fortune (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 10 comments) on Tuesday, Feb 26, 2008 at 9:48:58 PM

  (0+)

Got any solutions? I had some hope with Kucinich, but now I don't know. Is anyone going to stop them from from pulling the nuclear trigger? I mean spraying reactor waste on brown people's countries is pretty bad - and no-one has come down and stopped that! Three more warships on the way to the Middle East,, HELLO? Is there anyone out there? Ashtar? Sananda? Germain? For the children and fuzzy bunnys?

PLEASE?!/!?

<11:11>  

by Sha Llel (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 90 comments) on Thursday, Feb 28, 2008 at 8:31:49 PM

  (0+)

That was to you, bud.

by Sha Llel (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 90 comments) on Thursday, Feb 28, 2008 at 8:43:46 PM

  (0+)

That was to you, bud.

by Sha Llel (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 90 comments) on Saturday, Mar 1, 2008 at 4:10:43 AM

  (0+)

This is the short of a very long story and I'll make my point at the bottom.

I'm sure we're all familiar with the drones from May and June of 2007. None of them ever provided us with any kind of propulsion system. Consequenty, 1,000 plus armchair ufologists were all trying to figure this out and I was one of them.

Three of the 12 drones from the 40+ photos appeared alongside high tension wires, other electrical wires and telephone poles carrying both telephone and electricity.

My suspicion originally was if the drones were manmade and not alien (using antigravity) then possibly they were somehow feeding from the energy being released from the electrical wires.

What I discovered was an old patent filed almost 20 years ago on November 9, 1987 showing that such a drone was in the works. The patent was consequently issued on April 4, 1989. The background given for this invention is as follows.

Patent title: MONITORING SYSTEM FOR POWER LINES AND RIGHT-OF-WAY USING REMOTELY PILOTED DRONE
Inventor: Mr. Roosevelt A. Fernandes, Liverpool, New York
Description of Invention:

The present invention relates to a system and method of monitoring physical features of high voltage electrical conductors and/or environmental features along the power corridor through which the conductors extend. More specifically, the invention relates to a power line monitoring system and method utilizing a Remotely Piloted Drone (hereafter "RPD") which is flown along the power corridor and carries one or more pieces of equipment which provide observance and/or measurement of conductor and/or environmental features.

The reason this got further attention was because I discovered a secondary patent, which if manufacturered could have put the drones in motion by being able to utilize powerlines for charging in order to perform away from the lines. The only thing was, if this was actually the power source for the drones, why the big secret from the DoE considering their supposed usage per the patent.

This secondary patent was filed on February 6, 2004, regarding devices such as those mounted to a drone, which are coupled to high voltage transmission lines where they obtain power themselves directly from the line and to be used to power the drone. A common component of all these devices relates to the power supply energy source means for generating the comparatively lower voltage required for operation of the device. A further description of this patent follows.

Patent title: BODY CAPACITANCE ELECTRIC FIELD POWERED DEVICE FOR HIGH VOLTAGE LINES
Inventors: Gunn, Colin N., Lightbody, Simon H. Forth, J. Bradford Hancock, Martin A. and Hyatt, Geoffrey T.
Description of Invention:

Devices that couple to high voltage transmission lines obtain power themselves using the body capacitance of an element of the devices. The devices generate a comparatively lower voltage from the current flowing between the high voltage line and the element of the device that generates the body capacitance. The devices can be used to operate sensors that monitor the transmission lines or parameters of the power distribution system, such as current, line temperature, vibration, and the like.

Below is only one of the three drones sighted near power lines. In regard to the Birmingham drone, the gentleman who sighted it actually thought it was originally attached to the powerline.

For some reason picture urls aren't being accepted as is the article I wrote that goes along with the above. I got one posted here but the others won't go. If you want to see it and the pictures, just Google "Strange Craft May be Energy Systems Monitoring Drone, UFO Casebook".

Capitola, California drone

http://i215.photobucket.com/albums/cc111/publicaccount999/0516sc4.jpg

End result, it's a ton of work searching patents and there is much that can be discovered while searching but we've not found anything yet that ever panned out or was earth shattering anyway. If we had found anything earth shattering, trust me, we would have reported it to any interested party.

So you can at least see my curiosity. What I did find however were a lot of patents that were simply filed but the products died on the vine over the years and were never put into the flow of commerce.

by Alien Casebook (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 18 comments) on Wednesday, Feb 27, 2008 at 12:10:17 AM

  (0+)

If these patents really showed how to produce the equivalent of UFO's or zero energy devices, then, even if large corporations have bought the patents and locked them up, surely at least a few people would have built a few flying saucers for their own personal transportation.  Or built their own zero energy devices to power their homs and vehicles.  And if these workable patents have been around for a hundred years, that is not only more than enough time for some people to have built these devices but for other people to copy them until the devices became generally used and as ubiquitous as automobiles and light bulbs are in our actual world.  Where are they?

And claims that people have have achieved 10,000 miles from a gallon of gas, or even 5,000 miles, does strain my credulity.

Robert Halfhill   rhalfhill@juno.com 

by rhalfhill (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 325 comments) on Wednesday, Feb 27, 2008 at 3:25:38 AM

  (0+)

People haven't built them because most people aren't willing to dive into seven million plus patents to try and find them.

Sightings have risen to an all time high this last year, from all over the world.  So have the number of patent applications for UFO craft technology, in patent offices all over the world.

And as for ten thousand miles per gallon, would you believe it if the news came from Shell gas?  

http://www.shell.com/home/content/uk-en/

society_environment/eco_marathon/about/about_eco_marathon_0204.html

[I had to break this link into 2 parts because of 90 char limit in this editor]: 

 "They achieved a fuel consumption figure of 10,705 miles per gallon."

Why do you people spout off about these things without doing accurate, verifiable research first?

Regards,

by Luke Fortune (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 10 comments) on Wednesday, Feb 27, 2008 at 11:14:33 AM

  (0+)

http://www.shell.com/home/content/uk-en/society_environment/eco_marathon/about/about_eco_marathon_0204.html.

             "The history of the Shell Eco-Marathon stretches back over 50 years. It originated at Shell's research lab in Illinois, US, with friendly wagers between fellow scientists to see who could   get the most miles per gallon from their vehicles. From these humble origins, where the winner scarcely achieved 50MPG, more organised competitions evolved.
            In 1977, Shell organised the first competition at Mallory Park essentially for student teams. In 1978 the competition grew further and an open class was introduced.
            Over the years, the fuel economy record has been rapidly improved. The most recent record was set at the 2003 event by team Microjoule from St Sebastien/Loire in France. They achieved a fuel consumption figure of 10,705 miles per gallon - beating the previous record set by the same team in 2001 by nearly 500 mpg."

by Luke Fortune (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 10 comments) on Wednesday, Feb 27, 2008 at 6:41:35 PM

  (0+)

or is it disinformation? The government has been infiltrating UFO groups for decades and making outrageous statements through them to make them lose credibility. Publishing something like this in the patent office may be to set them off on a wild goose chase, wasting their own money trying to make one of these things to prove that they exist, sort of like the way disinformation might be fed to a foreign government to make them spend huge amounts of time and money on projects that go nowhere.

by Watching (0 articles, 1 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 313 comments [1 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Feb 27, 2008 at 4:06:00 AM

  (0+)

Maybe there was a day when such things happened but today, I seem to think that some UFO groups do that to themselves.  Looks like, sounds like, isn't.

by Alien Casebook (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 18 comments) on Wednesday, Feb 27, 2008 at 5:54:01 AM

  (0+)

My point is simple. If your group has gone through all these patents. Why don't you all just build some of this stuff? That would prove your point for you and you wouldn't need to write about how UFOs are made by us.

by arlen custer (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 466 comments [68 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Wednesday, Feb 27, 2008 at 10:12:01 AM

  (0+)

From what I understand...and I have interviewed Luke personally and known him for over a decade now...he is planning on doing just that.  He is a paralegal by day as he states and has just published the books.  I can tell you he is doing everything in his ability to pay the bills, continue research, write the books, fund construction, etc.  Finding people to work with has been a problem as well...either immediate giggles and guffaws by "debunkers", scientists who refuse to even listen, UFO researchers who immediately say Luke is a debunker to now people thinking he has an alien craft stashed in his garage or something.  Yet, progress is being made.

Going to the patent office and finding the plans have been on display in the patent office for going on 100 years is pretty powerful, don't you think?  Douglas Adams would sure get a kick out of this if he was still with us.

If this was just one or two patents, there would be no story.  However...3400 pages, over 260 patents...wow!  He has two more volumes worth of information ready to be published.

by John Novak (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 3 comments) on Wednesday, Feb 27, 2008 at 11:04:10 AM

  (0+)

Everyone know George Bush fly's into other countries in his flying saucer stealing their resources, but I didn't know he took his pet aliens with him.

by Blase Daniels (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 1 comments) on Wednesday, Feb 27, 2008 at 8:48:14 PM

  (0+)

Where is the info about the vehicle and tecnology used? I want one!
Well seriously, I'd like to know.

Also does anyone know what happened to the PANTONE engine? The diagram is posted on net (was a cple years ago, havn't checked lately). It doesn't get 10000/gal but saves by spliting H2O in H2 + O2 at super high temp recovered from the engine.

I saw a gas lawn mower built oin the principle in 2005 at ashow in France (Built by tec studentrs).

I don't understand the diagram bur do understand the principle.

If anyone knows, let me know.

I don't follow the comments regularly. Send me a copy of your post with answer (chrisddd40@yahoo.com) THANKS

Chris

by crispy (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 43 comments [13 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Mar 1, 2008 at 4:48:29 AM

  (0+)

The Germans developed UFO's during WW2 and actually deployed a few against Allied forces. It seems plausible to me that this line of research and development has been appropriated by elements of the military-industrial complex as a tool to control the public, supplementing religion among those who have freed their political judgment from other superstitious dogmas.

Dave Emory has looked into the UFO phenomenon and has an original and very persuasive take on it, here:

http://www.spitfirelist.com/lecture.html

One of the significant things he documents is a suspiciously high frequency of white supremacist activists among early UFO reporters.

by cryptodemocrat (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 1 comments) on Sunday, Mar 2, 2008 at 1:14:52 PM

  (0+)