Sometimes I wonder if MOOT stands for "man out of touch" .
Much of what you explain technologically is very speculative, and you seem very convinced that you understand communication theory beyond anyone else, or that you are sure it operates "This way" or "that way" using still undefined "exitation fields" or something outside "the electro-magnetic spactrum".
You seem to be a very authoritative source of knowledge, but I don't buy it Moot.
All I see is a person who quotes a lot of "buzz words" without understanding or defining any of the technology itself.
I can understand Linda and others pursuing the possibility of past links with people that YOU SAY were involved in past events, but if all you have done is link a bunch of heresay into stories that you are convinced are real to you, then you are asking us to help you chase down urban legends rooted only in total fiction and well wishing.
Now ......does that seem fair to US?
I think not Moot......
I don't want to get too much on your case here, but please try an solidify your "foundation of reality" because your whole premise is built on "quick sand" as it is now. The rest of reality is based on sand as it is, -so slight movements in quantification are always necessary, but we must be able to converge the terms into "STUFF" that makes sense.
Think of many people who have studied all these buzz words that you use so freely to justify your fiction. Does anyone else agree with your version of how these words are used??
Don't get me wrong here, I understand a lot and appreciate many of your observations. I would just like to see a bit more agreement with the rest of the investigating world of individuals contributing to this forum.
You are definately "one of us" mind you, -so I consider your input to be crucial,
I would appreciate it more if you were just... a bit more modest with your doses of "alien technology", at least until you can use terms that make a bit more sense to the rest of us who are also looking at all this possible new technology.
After writting all this, all I can say is: who am I to judge any of your explanation?....
The answer is quite simple....I'm desperatly trying to follow and understand your "technical jargon", and It does not work-out and I'm frustrated to the point where I will soon begin to ignore much of it.
Should I do that, or perhaps I can offer you the chance to step back and learn to synchronize what we know to be truth with past events and real phenomena? Isn't that what Linda's book is about?
peetee le trickfox.