posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 01:04 AM
reply to post by RICH-ENGLAND
Who said anything about back engineering, duplicating and improving ?
I'm not sure you are that familiar with Corso's claims. We are talking about small items, purpose and context generally unknown but exhibiting
manufacturing properties not wholly unlike existing research streams.
If anything was duplicated it was simply as a manufacturing process and unlikely to have then operated as it would in the original context, it was
then simply used to improve something that already existed.
The fact that space flight is still a chemical powered affair has no bearing whatsoever on Corso's claims. He never mentioned propulsion systems and
bear in mind Corso was Army, there is some evidence that the bulk of the wreckage went to the Air Force and the Army were given the crumbs (which
could be what Corso inherited).
There are dozens of reasons why even if something was recovered there would still be rockets, here are a few.
It isn't in the MIC's best interests for it to be otherwise.
The technology could not be understood or duplicated.
It was destroyed in any crash.
A suitable weapons system has yet to be built.
It is in use in the military - that's what all the UFO reports since have been and what Gary McKinnon hacked into.
It is able to be reproduced cheaply and built in your garage for a few hundred bucks - but someone decided we're not ready for the jetsons lifestyle