Author |
Topic: DAVID LAMB COMMENTS ON THE BWO (Read 362 times) |
|
admin
Administrator
member is offline
contact 1-417-739-4742
 
Gender: 
Posts: 535
|
 |
DAVID LAMB COMMENTS ON THE BWO
« Thread started on: May 22nd, 2009, 10:36am » |
|
Research Scientist David Lamb, expert in physics and material science.
Also works at a major US university. Findings were achieved using
X-Ray Diffraction Analysis: The artifact showed an unique “amorphous peak
and is a polycrystalline semiconductor”. To his knowledge this type of material
is not found anywhere on Earth. Also there is silver concentration of 4.3%,
here on Earth silver is used in this form by experimental scientist as a
catalyst for a superconductor. It is sprayed over aluminum and thus is in small
amounts as we see here from the test results. He postulated that this
could be used on a craft as a way to dispel magnetic fields, especially
in space as there is no energy expenditure needed for superconductivity.
Lamb has further speculated that this artifact is in fact a “quasi-crystal of
complex structure.” This is only in its early stages on Earth in the form of nanotechnology.
I am convinced Bob White saw what he describes. I have known Bob, Dr Gibbons, and Larry since January and have become good friends with them. They are not Hoaxers, but 3 retired men who have big hearts and are on a quest to solve the mystery of the object.
Before I met these guys I was a big skeptic. In fact, had they been up font with me and told me they had a piece of UFO, I would not have given them the time of day. In 1997 me and my wife witnessed the V shaped UFO over Phoenix. My wife insisted it was a UFO but I insisted it was simply an airforce aircraft, It didn't look that strange to me. It wasn't until the next day that the sighting was big news. I still believed it was an airforce project as we lived within a few miles of Luke AFB.
What's different now is that I have physical evidence. The physical evidence shows very unusual properties and a stoichiometry of materials that indicates a very technologically advanced metal. To my knowledge such technology did not exist in 1985 and only exist today at the experimental stages. That is enough evidence for me to investigate further. As Yb pointed out before, 99.9 % of UFO evidence is personal testimony, now we have physical evidence that can be tested.
David
|
| « Last Edit: May 22nd, 2009, 11:57pm by admin » |
 Logged
|
You can only go
as far as you push
|
|
|
Tonak
alien presence
member is offline
Posts: 1
|
|
Re: DAVID LAMB COMMENTS ON THE BWO
« Reply #1 on: Jun 8th, 2009, 09:31am » |
|
Looking at the object and the materials composed and the properties you defined, I would say it resembles an early Guass shell fired from a rail gun.
The buckling in the shell might be from impacting an object. The description of Bob White that the object left a grove in the ground implies that the object was 'fired' and not ejected.
Certainly if you believe prior Ufology reports of military attacks on UFO's where weapons seem to be deflected by some sort of field, that using a Guass shell which can pass though most fields would be a logical approach for the military.
Since Aiming Rail guns in 1984, was not trivial, one might conclude that Mr. White witnessed a planned test of the canon on a borrowed or domestic target created with UFO like properties.
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
darkwolf
alien presence
member is offline
Posts: 2
|
|
Re: DAVID LAMB COMMENTS ON THE BWO
« Reply #2 on: Nov 11th, 2009, 8:14pm » |
|
I hate to make my first post a contrary comment, but last I checked, iron was only in trace quantities in the object, as was chromium. This would generally rule out gauss (IE - EM launched) projectiles, as would the materials composition, which, as Chris Ellis has pointed out to me, has elements of an electronics-capable substrate. It would be interesting to have a diagram of the layers of this object, because while it has obviously melted, the core sounds relatively intact. One thing I did suggest, however, is that we are not taking into account the possibility of 'holistic design', which, while a relatively new concept to us in engineering (relatively), could be very well established in an older civilisation.
In the end, the only things we can be certain are a) The object. if it is machinery, is most likely now defective, if not from re-entry, then from examination procedures... b) It sporadically radiates, and c) these radiations are known to affect electronic devices in odd ways (also consistent with a damaged piece of high powered electrical machinery.
It should be noted from my (admittedly limited) research in this area that the A360 alloys (apparently the closest match we have) have some very interesting properties, and could (theoretically, at least), be used for electronic devices of great complexity (due to the interesting micro/nano-structuring of the material)
Hope that helps, peeps.
[EDIT] Dr. Lamb, I hope you're reading this. Have you considered the possibility that this is a damaged, yet fairly advanced RTG? It's one of the possibilities that fits...[/EDIT]
|
| « Last Edit: Nov 12th, 2009, 09:23am by darkwolf » |
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
