NASA BPP - Good Riddance
Date: Monday, August 19, 2002 @ 14:52:00 UTC
Topic: Testimonials


I thought it was interesting that the BPP site listed the types of correspondance they have received, they even bothered to list several excerpted emails from "delusional" folks.



Yes some are delusional, but some are merely unbusinesslike. They themselves admit that valid ideas come from "crazy" sources...besides who are they to say whether or not I channel Einstein or have been to the moon!

I was honored to see my email excerpted in this list. I would rather present myself as insane - insanity being the clothing around an idea - than BE another number crunching, dime-a-dozen, poindexters who think rocketry is still the best way or who are afraid citing GOD as a source would destroy their careers...
NASA BPP was a noble idea at first, but I can't reconcile any of it with the knowledge taken from Disclosure Project. Is it all really SO compartmentalised that Marc Millis was unaware his peers had AG figured out decades ago?
Speaking of Dr. Greer, couldn't SEAS back engineer something back engineered? Or get ahold of one of the persons who did the back engineering for the ARV's? Maybe they are really under close guard?
The University Pencil Pushers like Sarfatti aren't going to breakthrough anything and we delusionals are immediatly dismissed so...who'll get the recognition? I'd rather see a rogue inventor like me get into consensus reality rather than a rogue faceless R+D Skunkworks fella.
Goodbye NASA BPP...this stuff should be privatized anyway...Lets GO SEAS!
This dichotomy in background and approach to understanding the GUT is really fascinating. I'm putting my bets on me actually. I at least know that my lack of experience with equations and related squiggly lines IS AN ASSET. Less time being a calculator more time seeing scale invariant self-similarity in electron/galaxy morphology.
Those old schoolers will NEVER admit that psychedelic drugs will reveal FAR MORE about the architecture of free space than any text book. That creative breakthroughs come from DEVIATIONS in normal thought should be self evident, and yet utilizing drugs for this purpose is frowned upon.

Dogma in science is just more religion...
So I can't contain my zeal for the prospect of reducing my inertial mass in a typical business letter...SO WHAT MARC?
Yeah you laugh at me and claim I taint the whole scene but obviously someone higher up cut your budget because they thought you were a joke as well...like I said about Dennis Lee, sometimes you have to exploit the CRAZINESS not distance it from your subjective notion of "CRAZY"

Stop being apologetic about the metaphysical aspects, stop getting your info just from specialists, invite a few of your favorite delusionals to the events and see what happens.

Mathew "Yes I AM" Whitney





This article comes from ZPEnergy.com
http://www.zpenergy.com

The URL for this story is:
http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=129