Re: Venus Air****ps / by Brad Guth

On Jun 19, 6:39 am, Damien Valentine <valen...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On Jun 14, 8:05 am, BradGuth <bradg...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > Do you have anything the least be topic constructive, such as
> > pertaining to the R&D of rigid composite air****ps?
>
> Do you?

Yes I have lots to offers, but unlike your all-knowing self, I do not
have 100% of all the exact right answers.

>
> See, here's the thing that bugs me.  This thread didn't start out
> bad.  You have actual numbers (though I have no idea how accurate they
> are); you mention the Landis aerostat concept.  But then Liberator and
> Hagar jump on the topic immediately, hold out the bait...and you go
> straight for it, turning what could have been an actual engineering
> discussion into a rant about "Zionist NAZI wizards".

You already know that I'm only returning the favor, with all the love
and affection that I can muster.  So, what's your point?

>
> To your credit, you have occassionally tried to steer the thread back
> into relevant areas, but then you turn right around and push your
> DARPA conspiracy theory again.  The title of this thread is "Venus
> Air****ps", right?  Then talk about Venus air****ps!  Leave your ideas
> about government persecution to another thread.  (Preferably in
> another newsgroup.)

Where are your supposed good numbers, ideas, R&D or of whatever's
DARPA need-to-know about the complex applications of a composite rigid
air****p as intended for accompli****ng Venus?

Or would your rather pretend the past of dastardly deeds never
happened?

- Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth