On Jun 19, 9:24=A0pm, BradGuth <bradg...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> 33% is not half, but then my math isn't nearly as good as yours.
Evidently not .. apollo =3D 50% of nASSa's work to date? 33%?
> If it's of replicated science outside of anything DARPA/NASA, as such
> there's a good chance that it's believable.
Cite.
>
> RKA, ESA and JAXA are not independent of the DARPA/NASA thumb (aka
> MIB).
They're more trustworthy?
