The Fourth State of Matter
After you read this you may think twice about flying!

by gary d. goodwin & Raymond Ward updated 24 January 2002

Speculation has run wild since the downing of TWA 800. What caused it? Was it a mechanical failure? Was it due to pilot error? Was it a meteor? Or was it from an Navy ground to air missile? And now we have a rash of other planes (Alaska airliner off the coast of California, The Egyptian Airliner, the American Airliner down over New York following the twin towers situation, etc.) that have gone down with little or no explanation. At least not an explanation. most want to accept.

Seems like it's an area that collects every kook and opinionated person with a loud voice from here to tim-buck-two! So why do we need another opinion? Good question! As human beings, we want answers. We need closure on things, so that we can fix or understand what's wrong and move on with our lives. Not knowing the answers to these problems has left us STILL guessing and without closure, it has also left us with some other very real problems. Now there are more airplanes going down - and we are still without answers. I don't know about you but the answers that have been given surely have not satisfied me. I can't even fathom what it would be like to have had a family member on one of these recent downed flights. I think of the poor Egyptian family of the copilot that it is now being said took his own life and killed all of those other passengers in an act of terrorism. Maybe after the twin tower disaster this explanation is more palatable to folks. We at TMG resent our government accusing this man and causing obvious tension in international relations - thanks Bill Clinton. But when we don't know the answers, we grab for assumptions that oft times hurt others. They will continue to wonder and hurt for a reason for these horrible tragedies. They want a scapegoat.

There are some things that do make sense, that are related to the primary premise of this research group. So please bear with me, for one more explanation. - one more possibility.

In the instance of the TWA airliner, eyewitness reports claim that they saw a flash of light rising from the earth to the plane. This led many to believe that a ground to air missile was fired by the navy accidentally. Then there arose some speculation about faulty wiring in one of the fuel cells igniting the fuel. Flashes of light, conspiracy, etc. all makes for great intrigue. It may however be a very simple answer as we explore a straitforward alternative.

In the Egyptian aircrash it was reported (according to the flight and voice recorders) that the airliner was being controlled by the copilot. At some point the plane was taken off of autopilot (this does not mean that a human took it off with volition), the plane began a virtual zero gravity dive, the pilot came into the cockpit and said, "what's going on?". Not "what are you doing?" And isn't it surprising that he could even come into the cockpit in a zero-gravity dive? It is said that there was a struggle to right the airliner as it began another dive. And then a prayer was heard on the recorder. There are of course other details that you can find on other sites on the Internet. I'll not recount all of those details here. I will only say that I recently interviewed a pilot that it is rated in this plane. He told me two important details concerning this airplane. First, it would be impossible for one pilot to raise one elevator while the copilot lowered the other elevator. Secondly, the electronics and most of the hydraulics that they control are located in the tail of this airplane.

Over the last decade there have been a number of suspicious airliner crashes. For a list of these suspicious mishaps CLICK HERE.

Then this:

MEXICO CITY (CNN) -- All 18 people aboard a Mexican DC-9 jetliner were killed Tuesday when it crashed shortly after takeoff in a mountainous region of central Mexico.
Witnesses reported seeing a brilliant light in the sky and debris falling in the mountains 10 kilometers (6 miles) southwest of the town of Uruapan.
TAESA Flight 725 was carrying 13 passengers and five crew members when it crashed about five minutes after taking off from Uruapan in the state of Michoacan around 7 p.m. (8 p.m. EST) en route to Mexico City. The crash site is about 180 miles west of Mexico City.

In the Mexican airliner crash, like the Egyptian airliner the plane nose-dived into the ground. Just prior to the Mexican airliner coming down, there were eyewitness accounts of flashes of light in the sky.

Inspector Juan Alfonso Lara of the state civil protection agency said witnesses saw the plane explode in the sky, and the debris landed in the mountains. He said there was no chance of finding survivors.

This is automatically assumed to be an explosion of the airliner. The plane was said to be on fire as it hit the ground.

The crash occurred approximately 180 miles southwest of Mexico city. This area is well known for a large amount of volcanic activity. Probably the most famous of these volcanoes occurred less than twenty miles from the crash area:

Paricutin is but one of more than 1000 vents in the Michoacan-Guanajuato monogenetic field. The reason Paricutin is famous is because people were able to observe it forming from its very beginning. It is the famous "volcano that grew out of a cornfield". It was not really a very dangerous eruption for people, but it was quite destructive of their agricultural lands, livestock, and way of life. The eruption lasted from 1943 until 1952, produced a large cinder and ash cone, and covered an area about 8 kilometers by 8 kilometers with slow-moving lava flows.

This is not the only volcano that has raised up out of a farmer's field. A few years ago one also raised up in Russia. It went up from ground level to over a mile high in a very short period of time and was one of the most powerful eruptions of the twentieth century.

O.K. what does all of this have to do with airliner crashes?

In our previous article: THE HURRICANE/TYPHOON SOLUTION Practical Ideas To Avoid The Destruction Of Killing Storms we state:

The Aurora Borealis is the result of a current flow, dissipating through the earth's field. Sea water is less conductive than land. (See Tim Kelly's paper Observed Natural Events And Hypotheses Related To The Physics Of Fault-Free Earthquakes also see A.N.Dmitriev's paper Electrogravidynamic Concept of Tornadoes). Great charges of plasma are introduced into the upper atmosphere of the earth where they must be dissipated. Some of these charges are dissipated through the common storm systems that we see circling the earth. The source of these charges can be readily seen and explained in a recent paper entitled VENUS, THE SUN, AND WHAT?.

These currents and charges are found everywhere in the universe. Maybe that's a presumptive statement, we wouldn't want to be accused of the same crime as our critics! Perhaps we should say that these currents are being discovered everywhere we look. As we've said over and over time and again, space is not empty. These charges increase during solar storms. The earth is constantly being bombarded by plasma from the sun. Plasma is nothing more than very hot CHARGED hydrogen molecules. This charge must go somewhere. The earth being a perfect body for "grounding" out of these charges, the charges seek out the surface of the earth to do so. The earth also carries a charge and when these charges approach each other they try to level or equal out, and they can do so with a big bang. So you've probably heard that lightening goes upward from the ground. In our article THE HURRICANE/TYPHOON SOLUTION we display some awesome images of these charges bleeding through the upper atmosphere down through the clouds. These are called "Sprites". These charges are the source that power weather on the earth. The old model of evaporation where the sun heats the ocean, the water turns to vapor, then floats over the land, then the water condenses and drops the water in the form of rain is just not the real source of weather. In our model, the charges (which remember are nothing more than hydrogen ions - hydrogen being a primary component of water) attempt to equal out with the surface of the earth, and create h2o. These charges, not unlike a Tesla ball, where small charges zap against the grounded surface of glass, seek out a point to equal out. These points of grounding are where the weather occurs. Because the areas are so large (often many miles), and the nature of the charges are formed and shaped by the circumstances and the surrounding environment, the charges are sometimes seen and sometimes not.

We also see these connections between the earth and the upper atmosphere in other situations. Volcanoes, for instance, are the violent attempts of the earth to literally raise up and meet the sky that is full of great and powerful charges. In this incredible actual image of a volcano eruption (left), the charges can clearly be seen jumping between the sky and the evolving volcano. These bolts of charges are obviously not static discharges due to atmospheric dust as once thought. These discharges are powerful bolts with high flux density.

So mountains and volcanoes could be viewed as anodes for charges. In the old evaporation model of weather, the winds aloft force the evaporated molecular water against the mountain, the air rises and condenses, then rain falls from the sky. At first glance this seems quite logical, and indeed it might be the case in minute amounts and rare situations. But think about it a bit. There aren't mountains to make the moist air rise everywhere it rains. Warm air rises and cooler air descends. If air masses move against one another, then doesn't it make sense that the moving moist air would be cooler due to super cooling and then descend? Not rise, even (or especially) without a mountain? And what about the fact that as you travel upwards, generally speaking, the temperature becomes cooler? They say this is because the effect of gravity is less at higher altitudes and the molecules of air become less packed together and less active. So why does warm air rise? There are plenty of questions concerning this issue, and indeed the old school has all of the answers. Or so they think. But I would like to see the explanation. of these lightening bolts above this volcano. The old explanation. was that it was due to tons of microscopic dust particles rubbing against each other. Sorry, I don't buy it.

So yes we are claiming that electrical charges fill our atmosphere. And further that these charges are responsible for many unexplained occurrences in our world.

In addition to the proximity of the Mexican airline crash and the Michoacan-Guanajuato Volcano Field, there was another very interesting happening just prior to that same day. Here's the CNN report:

Nov. 8, 1999 A magnitude 4.6 earthquake jolted southern Mexico on Saturday at 9:03 a.m. local time, but there were no reports of injuries or damage. The quake was centered in the community of Santa Maria in the state of Oaxaca, and occurred at a depth of 47 miles (75 km) beneath the earth's surface. At least 22 people in Oaxaca were killed on September 30 when a magnitude 7.4 temblor jolted a broad area of central and southern Mexico.

So as you might also guess, we believe that earthquakes are also the products of electrical discharges. In fact, the theory we believe, can be applied to many different changes and occurrences not only on our planet, but throughout the entire universe. Earthquakes and volcanoes of course are usually correlated, but the pairing of earthquakes, volcanoes and weather with electrical discharges has yet to be thoroughly explored.

Electricity is not unlike water in its "desire" to reach the lowest point. Electricity seeks to be neutralized. If there is no conduit or force to shape its path, it will take the path with the least resistance. This fact can be seen throughout all of nature. Some places on earth may be more prone to this release, such as shorelines, mountains and areas dense with high iron content (iron because it is more conductive than silica or plain dirt, and because it is found in high concentrations in certain areas such as the eastern United States and seaboard). There may be other factors that affect the path of electric charges in the free atmosphere.

In the Mexican airline crash there were several variables that seem to add up to indicate that this idea is true. The earthquake, which occurred at a specific time and in a specific area. The recent volcanic activity in an area rich with volcanic activity.

The highlighted area is what is called the Michoacan Volcano Field. The Mexican airliner was flying from south to north. Compare the distance from the field to the earthquake site. And then consider the story of the airline crash again. Perhaps these could be just coincidences. But at this point the odds are already ruling out such a coincidence. Now figure in the occurrence of a number of these events with varying degrees of components. There's no doubt that not all variables, the earthquakes, the volcanic activity, the weather, the area will all be there. Perhaps this is why this has never been seriously studied. The idea is as elusive as trying to hold water in your hand, admittedly so. However, consider that the ability to control electricity is a very recent discovery. The lightbulb for light is a very recent taming of electrical power. It makes one wonder if electricity has really been tamed.

Another example of charges playing havoc with the environment and human understanding, has occurred a number of times with the shuttles. Here is another intriguing question: If wiring on airplanes is made far above automobile standards and far above what is expected to fail, then exactly why have there been so many problems with shuttle wiring? You would think that the shuttle standards would be that much tougher than airplanes, wouldn't you? The answer is fairly straight forward. Our shuttles have complex wiring and systems to accomplish safe flights. However there have been a number of delays due to what we call charge related deterioration. To the left, you will see the cause of one of these delays. This is an image from CNN and NASA which shows compromised wiring due to charge jumping. The wiring held in the technician's hand is burned from an electrical arc caused by the wire lying against the screw head in the picture. Was the insulation simply rubbed off and the arc occurred? Not likely. Remember this isn't a headlight wire in your old Buick! And not all of these short circuits have occurred over a screw as they would have you believe! This is the shuttle, with standards over and above even airlines. Charges build up and they must go somewhere. When the capacitance of the wire coating cannot contain the charge, it jumps.

You might recall that on the MIR space station the main computer had to be changed out nearly a half dozen times. Regardless of the protection the MIR offered in the way of shielding the charge still corrupted and literally fried the computers - over and over again. The strong solar storms that we have had over the last year or so have had a dramatic affect upon our satellite fleet. There have literally been dozens of communication and military satellites lost to charges and currents in solar storms. The amount of energy or current at any one point in space or in any area is related to the amount of attraction and the lack of resistance. The point is, if you have a big bowl of honey, the flies are going to come around!

As we've stated earlier, this process is not a local phenomenon, it is found throughout nature. In the greater solar system the planets and moons interact with each other based upon charge. From the galactic field down to the molecular level, charge and current is responsible for activity - "wheels within wheels". For instance on Wal Thornhill's page "Holoscience", he has recently posted an article documenting plasma effects upon Jupiter's moon Io. He points out valid arguments explaining volcanism verses plasma discharge. CLICK HERE to take a look at the article. I would encourage you to take a look at all of the other material he has posted also. Another good example you could take a look at is the great scar on Mars (above) that stretches nearly a third of the way around the planet. Is this the result of a discharge between Mars and another closely passing planet? Some say yes.

Another example of charge and current controlling and making changes in the environment is found right in the human heart. The human heart is basically super muscle that when at rest is full of negative charges. The brain sends a positive charge down through the nervous system causing the negative charge and positive charge to combine. The collapse of the charge along the pathway of the nerve causes the heart muscle to contract. This is not at all unlike the charges and currents that we have been discussing to this point in the Earth. In the Earth the atmosphere and magnetosphere act as a capacitor. When the charges build up to a certain point, the field collapses and the current combines or equalizes across the divide. Remember the term "Flux Density". A current will flow along the path that provides the least resistance and the greatest conductivity.

For example, current will flow through a copper wire as opposed to the open air, as the copper provides a very good conductive substance for the charge. This is a very simple explanation, but will suffice for our needs here. If you take two wires charged with current and place the ends closer and closer together, as you reach a certain point, the charge will jump through the air to meet each other. Hot gas provides an adequate conductive substance for current. In other words hot gas = conductive plasma. When we take jumper cables and run them between two cars, the current is passed from one battery or car to the other. There are many materials that provide good conductivity for charges and currents.

Now let's take a look at where this phenomenon could, or has happened, and could easily be ignored.

Most people do not realize that when the space shuttle lands on the earth, before anyone is allowed within hundreds of feet of the shuttle, the shuttle must be discharged. Either the static electricity from the flight down or the "dragging" of the upper field downward causes a great current to build up over the skin of the ship. Anyone who accidentally touched it's "skin" prior to this discharging process would literally be fried!

When the shuttle (or any airplane for that fact) takes off, it trails behind it a lasting long plume of hot gas. The greater current of the earth's field easily travels up the hot gas conduit in the attempt to be neutralized. Of course conditions change with multiple variables like temperature, humidity, current space weather, etc.. This doesn't mean that as soon as a plane or shuttle takes off, there will be problems. The current could actually be acquired at any point along the trip, at any real altitude. Well the implications we are making are serious here, and likely obvious to you by now. Let's examine some of these possibilities:

In the 1986 Challenger accident, It was believed that an "O" ring was compromised due to lower temperatures at the space center. The composite of the "O" ring couldn't mold itself in time to the shape needed to protect from a fuel leak. The leak occurred up the Solid Rocket Booster some distance from the aft heat. The fuel apparently ignited regardless, due to the heat from the compressed gas that was escaping. Flashes of light were said to be seen shortly after the launch and there were some reports of leakage even prior to takeoff. However the SRB's both remained intact after the explosion, only to be destroyed minutes later by the controller. Flashes of light, arcs jumping from the SRB to the primary tank... these sound like occurrences of electrical activity rather than exclusively fuel burn. The explosion took place at 46,000 feet/9 miles - two miles within the eleven mile ozone layer where water clouds are formed.

Another problem came up, actually over a number of other flights. This problem was related to the very large engine bells where we see most of the fire and power come out of. The engine bells have steel conduits that feed them with fuel as the shuttle blasts off. These conduits are made of very conductive stainless steel and spider web over the entire outside of each bell housing. As the flames pour out of the housing as the fuel is poured in, the plume of hot expended gasses trail out behind the shuttle. The towering gas plume is nothing more than hot plasma, stretched out for miles from the Earth's surface to the shuttle. The hot gas is an inviting flux tube for the Earth's charge. Depending upon recent environmental factors, the charge or current may be of different strengths and varying capacitance may also be seen. The immediate explanation for the leaks in the stainless steel conduits were broken drill bits left in the tank. It is easy to see that this is foolishness. An arching electrical charge can easily bore holes in metal. It simply melts the metal away from the point of contact. Then the fuel, under pressure, pours out of the new opening. In three consecutive stories from CNN you can almost see the straining for answers by NASA. Story one Story two Story three

On January 31, 2000 Alaska Airlines Flight 261, an MD-83 flying from Puerto Vallarta, Mexico, to San Francisco, California, crashed in the Pacific Ocean off California, killing all 88 people on board. Initial causes were cited to be a faulty elevator surface. In fact the recovered jackscrew assembly revealed that the threads in the nut had been completely stripped out. If that were all there were to the story we could fine and let it go. However there are some other details that must be considered. The black boxes were both recovered and of particular interest was the fact that they revealed that the crew repeatedly attempted to reset the breakers on the plane's electrical system. Why electrical problems when this appeared to be mechanical and related to hydraulics? Now there is no real published time line that we are aware of, but it seems logical that the pilot felt the loss of control, sudden dives and leveling offs, without his volition. This sounds eerily like the Egyptian airliner crash. So what was he thinking? Pushing and pulling on the yoke trying to regain some control. It would seem logical that the screw was stripped and the elevator was flailing up and down on its own. But this is not necessarily so. The added information that the breakers were being reset over and over gives the appearance that the crew believed the problem to be electrical. Note the position of the screw mechanism in the plane. It is rear and above the general mass of the plane. Is it possible that introduced strong current corrupted the computer on board and that the screw was the target of the flux? Remember flux density? That the damage to the screw was the result of the violent changes in computer command added to the increased wind shear form the dives? The likelihood of a failure of this type in this mechanism is below 3%. It would take literally several million pounds of tensile strength to strip these screws. This is more than the strength of the wings on the space shuttle. It is interesting that several other planes were discovered to have the very same damage in the following few weeks! The best advice that we could provide pilots if they find themselves in this kind've situation, is to NOT attempt to immediately reset the breakers. The resetting of the breakers would attract MORE current through the computer and likely through the entire body of the plane. If possible let the plane stall for two to three thousand feet if safe. This would allow the charge to dissipate or find another route of discharge from above or below.

In August of 1999 a massive earthquake hit Turkey - the strongest ever to hit western Turkey. The number of dead nearly reached 30,000! The quake hit 50 miles southeast of Istanbul, just before sunrise. This was the era of comet Lee and the total solar eclipse over Turkey. Flashing lights have been seen and reported to accompany earthquakes throughout history. In Alexey Dmitriev's paper called "Planetophysical Function of Vacuum Domains" he discusses the current flow and properties of vacuum domains as they occur in nature. He states:

"VDs are identified with manifold natural self-luminous objects of different kinds, such as ball lightnings, "plasmoids", poltergeist, tornadoes, "angels", "small comets or atmospheric holes", ionosphere and atmospheric explosions, lithosphere explosion tubes, "sprites", the glows connected with the earthquakes and the volcanic eruptions. That's why the study of natural self-luminous formations provide the experimental foundation for the development of physical and mathematical model of non-homogeneous physical vacuum and vacuum domains."

In the image above, taken shortly after the Turkey earthquake, at the site, two anomalies can be seen in the sky in the background. The size of the image makes them difficult to see - you can click on the picture to make it larger if you like. You can also see good examples of these phenomena in the above mentioned article by Dmitriev. No wonder that throughout our history we've heard of ghosts and goblins, things that go bump in the night, etc.. And what about UFO's? How many electrical phenomena have been attributed to being alien in origin? Before you send in your protest, we are not attributing all UFO sightings to be of this nature.

Now we come to a difficult one. Let me reiterate once before I bring this example forward - we are not saying that any of these disasters were necessarily a result of current flow. However there are questions that have not been answered that this idea seems to ring true to. It surely demands a closer look. In a recently televised special, the designer of the World Trade Center clearly stated that even the impact of a large airliner would not bring down one of the towers. The scene was horrifying. The tragedy is unspeakable by the mouth. But these facts: This statement was made in a recent MSNBC interview and story:

   "Hyman Brown was the project engineer on the twin towers, the man on the ground in charge of making sure the building was built right, the way it was designed. Brown, who spent six years building the towers, says the planes didn’t cause the towers to collapse, but rather it was the fire and tremendous heat that exposed the steel superstructure to forces it could not withstand. Each tower was built around a central core that kept the building up, supporting each tower’s so-called dead-weight. But when the steel melted, according to Brown, like dominos it fell. Brown says the towers were built to withstand 200 mile-per-hour hurricanes, the 100-year storm, the worst nature could dish out. But he says an airplane crash never entered anyone’s mind.  Still, it appears the outside columns, made of prefabricated steel, absorbed most of the energy from the suicide planes and may have kept the towers from collapsing immediately. University of Colorado engineering professor Stein Sture thinks the energy from those large planes would be equivalent to a medium, five or six Richter scale earthquake. The way the towers collapsed seemed similar to pictures we’ve become accustomed to watching, as old buildings like the Kingdome in Seattle are taken down with explosives."

The towers were made primarily of steel. The steel reached deep into the ground below the towers and high into the sky. Then, after the unthinkable... after the planes struck the buildings, a single great plume of hot gaseous smoke reaching to the sky made the connection complete. When they came down, they were pulverized. The concrete, as little as there was in the construction of the building, simply turned to dust - a few chunks, no pebbles or rocks, just dust. Is it possible that the connection was made and that the current of the Earth, being discharged through the buildings, caused the greatest damage? At first look, it appears that the weight of the towers caused the total destruction. However the destruction was so thorough, down to the granulation of the concrete seems unlikely done by just the weight of the upper building.

A couple last convincing thoughts - Many of the workers around Ground-Zero suffered from inhalation of smoke and dangerous vapors. One of those vapors found in large quantities at the site was Benzene. Benzene is commonly found around volcanic activity and not around buildings. And days after the tragedy there was a 2.9 earthquake in Manhattan. More than interesting coincidences, wouldn't you say? And how many days did the fire burn? Some interesting points to be sure.

Finally, one more connection in nature, more on an upbeat. The sun has been putting out some incredible shows over the last few years, since we have had SOHO cameras focused on it. The image below is one of my favorite. I have added something as you can see. The twisting and turning of the flares is common. And it is likely due to the electrical nature of the flare. Isn't it interesting that DNA does the same thing? It has been known for a few years now that on the molecular level, particles are attracted and bound together with a current of charge.

All that we are, all that we do and touch is related to a magnetic and electrical charge or current. What are the extent of the powers of this great force? Where else can we see the influence of these great forces? It is all around us and we are being told that they are not as important as we believe. Old theory and traditional science is telling us that gravity and their postulations are the controllers of the universe. What do you think? I think we're being lied to and kept under control by an archaic tradition. A tradition that uses our resources, fails and ignores reality.

It's time to force the issue.

Update 24 January 2002

Not too far from the Kremlin, in Moscow, stands the second tallest structure in the world. On August 28th of last year an interesting thing happened to it - especially in light of our above material. The following is said to be the cause of the fire that nearly took the building down:

"Short Circuit May Have Been Cause"
    "The fire broke out Sunday above the 1,500-foot level, knocking out TV and other communications. Officials believe it was caused by a short circuit or overload in wiring used by a paging company.         The tower is surrounded by parkland in northern Moscow, about nine miles from the city center, and does not threaten residential structures.
     It is second in height only to Toronto’s CN Tower, and was hailed as a marvel of Soviet engineering upon its completion. At the time, it surpassed the Empire State Building as the world’s tallest structure."

Isn't it remarkable how the electrical issue arises time and again?

Note the structure of the tower. Does the expression "lightening rod" come to mind? The tower is 1771 feet tall and took 54 months to complete.

When the fire began, the television signal to three national stations was cut off. Over ten million citizens woke up to white snow on their television screens. It was reported that the KGB was on site looking into the possibility of it being sabotage. However the investigation turned up nothing that would indicate such. But in their typical manner, someone had to be found to blame the problem on. They had already punished people at the tower for the sad state of the firefighting equipment it was reported. Putin blamed it upon a "dilapidated infrastructure", regardless of the fact that the tower was built only in recent years.

However, because a structure isn't high up into the atmosphere does not mean it isn't at risk. Although there may be many variables, the primary cause may be more related to flux pathways and flux density in the area. These variables or conditions must be right to come together to create an "overload" in the existing system. Attraction of a pathway is more likely related to existing nodes, flux, and atmospheric conditions such as moisture and temperature.

An example of this could be the recent loss of the Kursk submarine and the many Russian sailors' lives that went down in the icy waters of the Barents Sea.

First reports state the ship ran out of control; That there were "errant" explosions on board; That it was due to a collision; That the Kursk went aground after forward torpedo tubes filled with water. But the most revealing may be a report from a British rescue sub operators that said there was extensive damage from a "high energy source". Later reports say that there were two explosions in the front of the ship from exploded torpedoes. But in conflict with that report, Russia's Deputy Prime Minister Ilya Klebanov stated that video feed shows damage not only to the aft of the sub, but also to its conning tower and to the rear of the vessel.

Now is it possible that this was simply an accident? Is it possible that not every airliner, big building and ship at sea accident is attributable to an electrical cause? Absolutely. This is definitive! But the questions must be raised. In none of these previous examples has it even been suggested in passing that there may be such a cause. This only causes more suspicion. Especially when it is clearly indicated as a possibility in all of these situations. TMG researchers are not fools and idiots as the status quo would have you think. We are simply stating that our traditional view of examination is biased and influenced by the common human trait of pride and desire for power. If traditional research and science are unreliable due to this factor what shall we do? Shall we continue down this path and watch more and more suffer and die? A difficult question. A difficult question no one seems to be willing to approach except us.

A Clue?

A closer look at all of the above examples reveals something quite remarkable. All of these accidents occurred either on the shoreline or near the shore. TWA 880 occurred just off shore from the New York coast line, the Alaskan Airline tragedy was skirting the coast of California, the Egyptian airliner was over the east coast line, the Mexican airliner skirting the Pacific coast, the World Trade Center of course is very near the water and the Kursk was in very shallow water when it went under. The exception of course is the Moscow Tower. Is there an increase in charges on the continental shelf? Well over ninety percent of lightening occurs over land, not over the oceans or seas of the world. Is there a pattern here? Why would the charges build up between land and water? What is there about this area that induces apparent greater charges? We welcome your comments. Stay tuned for more on this!

All material is copyrighted by THE MILLENNIUM GROUP and may not be used without their express permission.