Friday, August 03, 2007
The Blame Game Begins
Conspiracy theorists are all over the map on various topics from 9/11 to Katrina to the moon landing. However, this one is pretty far fetched, and to tell you the truth, if we had this kind of capability, I don't think Iraq or Afghanistan would still be standing.
But check this out:
So we have an acoustical weapon that can destroy a major freeway bridge without leaving evidence? We have a weapon that can destroy at the speed of sound without so much as a PEEP from anyone else in the scientific world except these guys?
To tell you the truth, if we did posses such a weapon, I'd gladly laugh at the face of those who say that the US is falling behind in the sciences. Even Nicola Tesla said that given just the right frequency, he could split the Earth in two. I remember an episode of Mythbusters where they tried this myth out. It wasn't true....at least from what Jamie and Adam tried.
Regardless, until a report is issued on the subject, I'll keep an open mind, but I'm pretty sure that the US government would have tried this weapon on something a little more remote, such as a bridge that no one goes on that's old and rickety. Why involve human lives? Why destroy something and then pay hundreds of millions of dollars to have to rebuild? It doesn't make much sense to me.
Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com
But check this out:
So we have an acoustical weapon that can destroy a major freeway bridge without leaving evidence? We have a weapon that can destroy at the speed of sound without so much as a PEEP from anyone else in the scientific world except these guys?
To tell you the truth, if we did posses such a weapon, I'd gladly laugh at the face of those who say that the US is falling behind in the sciences. Even Nicola Tesla said that given just the right frequency, he could split the Earth in two. I remember an episode of Mythbusters where they tried this myth out. It wasn't true....at least from what Jamie and Adam tried.
Regardless, until a report is issued on the subject, I'll keep an open mind, but I'm pretty sure that the US government would have tried this weapon on something a little more remote, such as a bridge that no one goes on that's old and rickety. Why involve human lives? Why destroy something and then pay hundreds of millions of dollars to have to rebuild? It doesn't make much sense to me.
Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]
