3 ms·

Today's update to their Quantum Stealth page adds some credibility: http://www.hyperstealth.com/Quantum-Stealth/index.html http://www.hyperstealth.com/Quantum-

by zennova 14y ago

Today's update to their Quantum Stealth page adds some credibility: http://www.hyperstealth.com/Quantum-Stealth/index.html http://www.hyperstealth.com/Quantum-Stealth/index.html "With close to 5,000 worldwide news stories on our Invisibility Cloak over the last 4 days, we want to show one of the best stories so far. The reporter contacted the Canadian Military for confirmation that we had met them (CANSOFCOM) and demonstrated the technology. He also contacted Colin Worth, CEO of Cornerstone Protection Agency (Mr. Worth is a recently retired 26 year RCMP Officer) who accompanied Guy Cramer, President/CEO of Hyperstealth to the Canadian Military and RCMP meetings and William (Bill) Jarvis, Principle of the 132 Group (Mr. Jarvis is a recently retired 19 year Navy SEAL) who accompanied Guy to the U.S. military command meetings. Both Mr. Worth and Mr. Jarvis confirm the meetings and claims about the technology. Maple Ridge News: Is there an invisible cloak?" http://www.mapleridgenews.com/news/183440961.html http://www.mapleridgenews.com/news/183440961.html Also, according to their site, Hyperstealth has their camouflage on 2M military uniforms and 3K military vehicles. If they have an ongoing business and reputation is important in military procurement, why would they risk fraud?

talmand 14y ago
I see nothing in that article that lends credibility to this. He doesn't want to show the cloak actually working but mockups are fine. If the mockups are accurate then how is that different than showing an actual photograph of the cloak working? The information needs to be secure, but hey, here's a list of people who've seen it working. Also, by the way, this is how it works. Two sources to verify the technology weren't able to be contacted. Not that there was no comment or response, they couldn't be contacted. No names of who exactly in the U.S military has seen the cloak working to verify their judgement of the technology. One name from the Canadian military who has seen the cloak, but the Canadians are going to pass for now and might revisit it in the future. The cloak has to be designed for each application, which means it's use is likely highly limited. So, is this completed and ready-to-go technology that needs funding for mass production or is that he needs funding to clean up a handful of potential problems before it is ready for field use? Sorry, I must see it in action to believe it works as described and is actually useful.

by zennova 14y ago

talmand 14y ago

I see nothing in that article that lends credibility to this. He doesn't want to show the cloak actually working but mockups are fine. If the mockups are accurate then how is that different than showing an actual photograph of the cloak working? The information needs to be secure, but hey, here's a list of people who've seen it working. Also, by the way, this is how it works. Two sources to verify the technology weren't able to be contacted. Not that there was no comment or response, they couldn't be contacted. No names of who exactly in the U.S military has seen the cloak working to verify their judgement of the technology. One name from the Canadian military who has seen the cloak, but the Canadians are going to pass for now and might revisit it in the future. The cloak has to be designed for each application, which means it's use is likely highly limited. So, is this completed and ready-to-go technology that needs funding for mass production or is that he needs funding to clean up a handful of potential problems before it is ready for field use? Sorry, I must see it in action to believe it works as described and is actually useful.