Verify your sources? That source is rubbish with respect to this question, I looked and it doesn't say anything about leaks from Los Alamos. Your 'source' answe

Verify your sources? That source is rubbish with respect to this question, I looked and it doesn't say anything about leaks from Los Alamos. Your 'source' answers nothing, sorry. I presented my sources: my intelligence and intuition, plus the existence of SAPs. The speed of light problem? Did the speed of light change much in the decades between these breakthroughs? I don’t think so, and I don't think it's the blocker. You’re saying the unknown is impossible. I’m saying the unknown may be. Your claim is stronger and requires more rigorous proof. More importantly, I see through your behavior and your claims. You have a pattern: you dress up in rhetoric that projects authority, while misframing any other views as crazy but underneath such abuse your points are weak, and not even logical. Your projected your "conspiracy theory" obsession onto this discussion, and said it 20 times. I never said conspiracy (a secret plot to do something bad). And the only theory I put here is about projects, what happens in them. Yet from your misframing, every SAP is a supposedly a conspiracy while you act like their existence is impossible--yet SAPs are fact. Ignoring that, and obsessively repeating the "Jedi mind trick" mantra of "conspiracy theory" as a term of abuse as if it will shame anyone with a view different to yours into silence, or somehow banish the truth, is crazy. And it's bad, and abusive. All because you're insecure, overcompensating by trying to "prove" you're right, and other's "wrong", and uncomfortable with saying, "I don't know". But if you remove all the intimidating, framing rhetoric, you points are just a lot of nonsense and lack of logic. You get a scared person, being mean to others, refusing to open their mind in the face of logic, and insisting on abusively imposing their small minded view on other people, because they’re too threatened by the reality that there is much they don’t know. Basically it seems like what your saying is: SAPs are not possible to be 10 years more advanced than public knowledge, SAPs cannot even really exist because it’s too hard to keep something secret, and anyone who suggests that SAPs could be far ahead, are actually just “cockamamie conspiracy theorists” intent on not paying due credit and admiration to the people who deserve it. And anything secret can be predicted absolutely by what you already know. But actually it sounds like you have a conspiracy theory...about conspiracy theorists, and the limits of your knowledge. And it seems like you're in the parallel universe here because in everything you're saying it's like you pitted against the evil conspiracy theorists of the world who you are imagining are everywhere and are the cause of all the world's ills, while also simultaneously also being sort of ineffective and crazy, and yet you, the hero, the one righteous truther, are the last beacon of truth guarding against this. Pathetic. And your imagined bogeys and imagined crusade doesn't justify any of your abuse. You speak with such authority--earn and act like the airs you merely project. You haven't. You need integrity, you don't show that here. And you've got abusive disdain for different views, it doesn't make you strong, it makes you weak. It doesn't make you smart, it makes you the crazy one. You said my views are crazy. I'm pushing back. I'm saying you're crazy. I didn't want to say this, I wanted you to be different but you weren't. And I chose to say it, to expose the truth of what you did and said. I'm not gonna let that stuff slide and pretend I don't see what I see, I'm gonna call it out. That's what I'm doing. I treated you very good and was very fair--more than fair, I was super generous--and you just kept chanting your abusive claptrap, while retreating into a narrow view of the pretending what you know proscribes all that was, is and can be--while I discussed the unknown, which was the point of the question. You kept puffing up your weak points with pompous abusive rhetoric. And when I didn't play your game, you gave up. And now, once it's over, I'm saying what you did. Thank you for your time, and this opportunity to say it clearly.