archiving as opposed to backing up

From: Dwight K. Elvey <dwight.elvey_at_amd.com>
Date: Fri Sep 24 11:43:56 2004

>From: "Ed Kelleher" <Pres_at_macro-inc.com>
>
>At 05:49 PM 9/23/2004, you wrote:
>> > >> Once I was given a set of coordinates by Ted, who has been mentioned
>> > >> before in this book. Ted is a rabid UFO fanatic, and liked to sneak
>>UFO
>> > >> targets into our tasking now and then. This was forbidden, but he
>> > >> sometimes did it anyway. I thought that the target on this particular
>> > >> day was an operational target and was not expecting an ET target.
>> > >>
>> > >*cough*hooey!*cough*
>> > >
>> > >g.
>> > >
>> >
>> > Thank you Gene. My sentiments exactly.
>> > Dwight
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>I am glad I wasn't the only one wondering what Sokolov was smoking when he
>>wrote that quote.
>
>I don't know. It could have happened that way.
>
>
>
>Ed K.
>
>:-)
>
>

 It could have been a giant elephant sneeze but that is highly
unlikely as well. It has all of the marks of a object that
was loosely held together that was traveling at very high
speed ( not orbital speeds ) that completely disintegrated
in the atmosphere. That would best fit a small comet like
object. The areas effected correlate well with just such
an object. Thye do not correlate with something that blew
up with some internal power source. The results of the
damage do correlate with an object having a large kinetic
energy, transferred to a shock wave in the atmosphere.
 Why do we have to find the most unlikely explanation for
it when the likely one fits so well?
Dwight
Received on Fri Sep 24 2004 - 11:43:56 BST