The report was entitled "The T.T BROWN ELECTROGRAVITY DEVICE: A Comprehensive Evaluation by the Office of Naval Research."

But this report seems to have disappeared. Like Roswell records, the key records seem to be missing.

Also missing were lab bench test results of an experimenter named Mark Stambaugh at the University of Arizona who, evidently being inspired by a report of a saucer that was flying out of Edwards AFB, decided to duplicate the propulsion technology and, after a little experimental effort, found that by using very heavy copper plates that were immersed in a transparent polycarbonate and using very high voltage of around a million volts that his bench prototype suddenly lifted up into the air. These results would seem unlikely to be a corona effect of sharp points and wires as the copper plates, surrounded by clear dielectric, seem unlikely to be generating enough ion wind to conceivably be the cause of the levitation.

However, those who seem to monitor public efforts noticed something about the cause of the levitation that caught their attention as unknown parties who claimed that, under the national security act of 1947, they had the right to confiscate this prototype device, which subsequently disappeared. This is of considerable interest for a device generating life via "ion wind."

In addition this experimenter was warned not to inventany more devices generating such "ion wind."

Could it be that the NASA BPP office, no longer funded, wasn't what it seemed? Was it more like the USAF's now closed Project BLUEBOOK, which (it should be obvious to all by now) was a public relations effort in "duck and denial." The real action was elsewhere--- according to some researchers and accounts--- on the under flip side of Project BLUEBOOK.

Dr. Paul LaViolette in his classic monumental study "Secrets of Antigravity Propulsion" described how solicitations to the NASA BPP office were studiously avoided if they dealt with any electrogravitic proposal, no matter how well-documented or coupled to solid test results.

Yet the gravity secret has not been kept. It has been an open secret that has leaked like a sieve. Leaked into the enthusiasms of the at least three separate groups that traveled to the Tejon Ranch RCS facility, and into the enthusiasms of the very many more individuals who have walked and watched from the edges of Area 51.

It has leaked repeatedly in the vicinity of the Warton BAE Special Projects Site (near Preston) in Lancashire in the U.K. There have been numerous sightings of a small 30 ft on a side equilateral, flying triangle in the vicinity of the Warton site. The same flying triangle (occasionally seen hovering) was often escorted by Royal Air Force jets. A concentration of flying triangle sightings with escorting RAF Tornado's took place in Barrow-in-Furness in mid 1996.

The only sound heard, even when hovering, has been a slight humming sound. Some observers insist the flying triangle was almost silent.

It certainly looks and sounds like field propulsion. Hundreds of people have seen this highly agile vehicle.

These sightings started over ten years ago and include a few sightings of the triangle ascending and descending vertically at the Warton BAE (heavily secured) site. There is also a recent report of a much larger, silent, black triangle being led by an RAF Tornado jet.

BAE Systems, which has heavy multi-billion dollar alliances with Lockheed-Martin, has been an official sponsor of "Project Greenglow," a theoretical gravity control study.

Is it a convenient cover story?
Does the RAF escort "our" flying triangles?
Does it escort "theirs"?

The gravity secret has been effectively kept from most of the academic and scientific world, most of whom would rather be horsewhipped than caught reading the pages of UFO magazines.

But those derided, dismissed, disrespected magazines for the most part described accurately the unpredictable, but historic observations of late 80's through the mid 90's in the Antelope Valley or the much laughed at "Area 51" sightings.

Certainly, Janet airways, Boeing 737's landing lights that are seen coming and going from Area 51 are mistaken for UFOs. "Red Flag military exercises" flare drops are confused by the credulous with UFOs. Yes, slick self-promoting conspiracy theorists abound. These are separable side issues used by debunking skeptics to distract from the solid core of truly anomalous non-aerodynamic observations.

For example consider the following Area 51 report which should have made it's way onto the pages of Aviation Week:

On December 6, 1990, a group of 30 in broad daylight in the early morning watched, in Gary Schultz's language, as a "huge glowing saucer, which was pulsating a brilliant orange-red was sighted flying slowly over the jumbled hills--and it was being followed by a military helicopter" about a quarter mile behind.

After a minute or so the saucer disappeared behind the hills of the Nellis Air Force range, and the helicopter finally landed at a facility atop Bald Mountain. The entire incident was captured on videotape.

What happened here? Was it a chance appearance by an alien craft that just happened to allow itself to be followed by a helicopter, that happened to return to an area of rumored alien craft back engineering?

Or can we wield William of Occam's ever-sharp logical razor, in this case, to reveal the plain situation of a helicopter escort of a gravity propulsion vehicle.

It wouldn't be the first time. There are multiple reports of UFOs being escorted by helicopters around the massive U.S. Fort Hood Army Base in the 70's. This escorting took place near a mysterious underground facility located in the vicinity of the Robert Gray Field. Multiple sources indicated advanced technology related to UFOs was being researched at this facility.

There are simply too many competent aerospace observers, such as Mark Farmer, who in Jan 1994 on the edge of Area 51, reported watching through a telescope as an oblate spheroid-a saucer-making incredible accelerations, nearly instantaneous turns, impossible moves that were also "impossible" to be ignored.

Do UFO tourists haunt Groom Lake, or do we test saucers there?
Choose between those two sharp realities, or do we label these observers as "misperceiving fools" and liars.

There seems to be an editorial filter for anything remotely like a UFO.
How does this missing reportage work?

In an exceptional issue of Aviation Week & Space Technology (Oct 1, 1990, there was mention of quiet flying triangles in the Southern California area) and reports of other black projects, albeit advanced conventional craft-but no mention of "saucers." Not once.

The taboo observation is "flying saucer," whether "ours" or "theirs."

But someone came close to going over the line in that strangely rebellious issue. There were references to "exotic technologies not fully understood" and mentions of high altitude, high-speed, silent aircraft resembling pulsating lights, making racetrack turns. Did someone come perilously close to the taboo three letter combination?

Why this issue discussed black projects, and came close to the editorial line, is a "big unknown" to this author.

It is known (from a personal source) that quite an internal flap ensued. An editor's hands were slapped-an editor who had a strong personal interest in UFOs. Deep black stories virtually dried up in AW&ST. The rebellious incident was quietly handled.

An exceptional and courageous aviation journalist is James Goodall, who reported on stealth technology ahead of most. Jim Goodall has developed many "black world connections"-including three in Area 51.

These sources flatly stated that "alien technology" is being tested at Groom lake. One source, a Lockheed employee was asked about UFO's at the facility stated; "they are absolutely, positively real'. Jim Goodall reported that, since reporting this, all of his sources connected to the program have gone mute.

The evidence accumulates and accumulates; evidence that sometimes clearly visible, impossibly fast moving exotic test flights have taken place in the same area as where the rumors of alien craft back engineering indicate a major breakthrough in "electrogravitic propulsion."

The skeptics keep howling "A secret of this magnitude couldn't be kept!"

I re-echo that it hasn't been kept…skeptics just aren't paying attention!

There are numerous free-lance leakers that again have been ignored. Well before the Disclosure Project held it's politically sensitive National Press Club press conference, other individuals rebelled. Were they sick of the secrecy when. mortally sick themselves?

Skeptics simply avoid dealing with serious leakers. In 1993 at an aerospace R&D conference in a room with 15 people, including Jan Harzan, the Orange County MUFON Director, Dr. Ben Rich, the legendary leader at the Lockheed Martin "Skunk Works" made a strange but powerful statement.

Rich stated that we already had the means to the stars, but that this capability was locked up in the deep black world and would take an act of God to break this out into the open. Had he gone mad, or was he finally mad at the secrecy?

The late John Andrews, head of the Testor Corporation and also a legendary Lockheed engineer himself was a close personal friend of Ben Rich. Andrews, before his death, revealed to Bill McDonald, his successor, what Ben Rich had personally told him. According to Andrews, Ben Rich had made stunning claims, such as that there are two kinds of UFOs; the ones we build, and the ones they build. The "ours and theirs" problem appears at the crux of the matter once again.

Ben Rich stated that we learned from both crash retrievals and hand-me-downs. These matters are handled by an international board of directors, which he began to feel, at the end of his life, could constitute a real threat to our freedom. Here we have the "we" of who has field propulsion again, echoing Dr.Greer's highly ridiculed revelations on where the power on these matters resides.

It is this watcher's judgement that based on the evidence, the final laughter on this will be had by many who are now being mindlessly and maliciously maligned.

Skeptics will ask, "Where are all these super-secret black project vehicles maintained or manufactured?"

Well, perhaps, sometimes they may be right under their upturned skeptical noses!

According to Disclosure Project witness, Mark McCandlish, who toured AF plant 42 several years earlier under the sponsorship of a Col. Hornung, he met a Northrop employee who worked at that B-2 production facility. This employee witnessed the arrival and departure of a disc-shaped vehicle at the Lockheed "Skunk Works" facility in the dead of night. Small details emerged in this real event that confirm in surprising fashion elements of truth.

Between 1956-1958, The U.S. ran RB-47's into the Soviet Union in reconnaissance missions, in operation "Home Run" where total radio silence was the order of the day. What does this have to do with super-secret craft and their flights today?

On this 1992 night, the hidden observer watched as a shrouded shape emerged from the hangar and the large cover was removed, revealing a. black lens shaped object nearly 200 ft across. Several ground personnel began to wave flashlights with plastic tips that glowed in the near dark, as the object silently and slowly ascended to a couple of hundred feet, whereupon the disc began to blink back with small lights on its periphery.

Then it suddenly and in a breathtaking acceleration hurtled into the east, climbing at an incredible rate, and was gone in moments. The hidden employee was stunned and as he put it:

Why were such primitive instruments as flashlights employed? Because this left no "Sigint" (Signal Intelligence) trail for a foreign nation to intercept.

This is a measure of the extreme level of secrecy. Perhaps by now, there has been a slight added step in the security procedures and the area around the arrival of such exotic craft is swept for hidden observers with more care.

Yet what effective purpose do such leaks serve when the risks taken and the details related, are simply trashed, thrown in the waste can, and not addressed or examined in the giant spreadsheet of evidence of operational vehicles using field propulsion?

Must we dispense a demerit of anti-empirical shame on those who will not address the data. Such accounts as this deserve to be used in an intricate intelligence and investigative process that builds up, putting all the congruent pieces into an incredible picture of a huge breakthrough of epochal degree, which is (in this observer's conclusion) a secret space fleet, which is the real space program.

Did young U.K. computer hacker, Matthew Bevan, climb through one of those holes in the secrecy wall, when he hacked into Wright-Patterson's database and claimed he found documents on gravity propulsion engines, and received a visit from MI6 intelligence types? The charges were dropped for reasons not fully explained.

Now a new peek into the secret empire is the case of Gary McKinnon, also of the UK, who is facing extradition to the U.S, and if convicted a life in "supermax ," a concrete coffin nearly identical to sensory deprivation.

His crime is hacking in curiosity into the USSC, and finding a collection of documents that detail a secret space fleet, with ship names that do not match naval ships, and in particular refer to a non-terrestrial officer corps, ship-to- ship transfers, and "off world alien liaison" and other related activities.

If the data that Mr. Mckinnon found is mere honey-covered bait, why the full court press to incarcerate Mr. McKinnon? This observer wonders at the nearly desperate degree that U.S. is pursuing this case. It resembles a reckless attempt to frighten any copycats.

Does this not reflect a level of a fear so deep that the US is willing to risk the exposure of more secrets with all the dangers of inadvertent exposure of some fact regarding the true purview and turf of the "USSC"?

Yes, the USSC, also known as:

Why is it that the best leaks from key insiders are even more likely to be rejected or ignored. Is it the quality of the source(s), or the content that they reject?

Here we have something skeptics love to choke on, something that can't be written off as misidentification or misperception. Several, perhaps up to four individuals, claim to have seen, or known about three differently sized saucer-shaped objects, silently hovering in a hangar at Norton AFB Nov 12, 1988.

These spacecrafts were known as "Alien Reproduction Vehicles" or ARVs.

The multiple witnesses tell similar details involving 3 ARVs, 24, 60, and 120 feet in diameter, being in the inner security area of a large complex of large Quonset type structures.

These eyewitness accounts emerged from two directions, one being the Bill Jenkins radio talk show "Open Mind" witnesses, the other the Disclosure Project witness, Mark McCandlish, an aerospace illustrator--with high security clearances. At the same time as a public air show was going on, a very private demonstration was held.

Mark McCandlish, heard of the showing from his friend Brad Sorenson, who actually toured the exhibit. Mark McCandlish subsequently called the office of his congressman for the demonstration district, the late George Brown Jr., the chairman of the congressional committee for space science and advanced technology, assuming such an effort was coordinated by the AF public affairs office. Incredibly, a staff member confirmed the exhibit, and that there were three discs there. Was a disclosure in the works? Or, was this a lapse in security?

Skeptics have the simple choice of labeling these disclosers as coordinated cooperative liars or taking seriously their reinforcing detailed accounts.

Panels on one of the discs were opened revealing the crew compartment, constructed of a composite material. Brad Sorensen and Kent Sellen's accounts, were similar, the latter having seen the same vehicles at Edwards AFB as a Crew Chief for experimental aircraft. Other details included what appeared to be capacitor plates applying the Biefeld-Brown Effect, possibly separated by Dow Chemicals "G-10" Barium Titanate dielectric.

The surface of these craft was greasy in spots and pitted, indicating both old age and use?