Los Angeles Police arrested a man dressed as Chewbacca on Thursday. His crime: Head-butting a tour guide on the Hollywood Walk of Fame "who told the character he shouldn't be asking a tourist for money," reports KABC-TV.
A collection of oddball types roam the Walk of Fame, dressed like Tinseltown characters. They pose for pictures with out-of-towners -- usually, in exchange for a few coins. On Thursday, "Chewbacca was putting his arm around a tourist, and the tourist didn't want him there," explained a gaunt, dye-jobbed "Superman" to the Jimmy Kimmel Show. A Starline Tour employee told Chewie to back off. And as everyone knows, it's not wise to upset a wookie. "He head-butted him," Supes added. "The cops were called, and they came down, basically to arrest Chewbacca."
"I'd see him get upset at people, like for not tipping. Like they'd walk off. And he'd get really pissed. Right there and then, take the mask off and start chewing them out, cussing," said a nasal-voiced man wearing a Scream mask. "Even in front of kids."
"Now we want to make clear that this is not the actor who played Chewbacca in the movie, this is just the guy who plays him on the Hollywood Boulevard," a hapless KABC correspondent duly noted.
"I'm sure Han will come and shoot him out of jail and rescue him," Kimmel quipped.
200 Years of "Mind Control"
My Popular Mechanics piece on ‘bioelectromagnetic’ weapon reseach is now online, and as Sharon Weinberger’s intriguing Washington Post article last week made clear, there has been a great deal of military research into the area of "mind control" (though they would prefer to use the term "behavior modification.")
Many people believe they are being targeted by such weapons. Certainly it's a growing phenomenon in the U.S.:
''In the United States, you don't see nearly as many mentally ill people anymore who have delusions and hallucinations with regard to God and the saints as you did 20 or 30 years ago, when I first doing this work. In our secular society, it's more a matter of, well, the President or the C.I.A. is affecting my behavior by radio waves or microwave receivers in my teeth.''
But the problem goes way back. One case from London was James Matthews, who said he was being influenced by an implant in his head by a gang using a weird electromagnetic device. This group, one of many, he called the Air Loom Gang, and among the tortures they inlicted on him were implanting thoughts ('kiteing'), stopping him from speaking ('fluid locking’), cutting his circulation ('sudden death squeezing’) and ‘brain lengthening’ which would 'cause good sense to appear as insanity, and convert truth to libel'.
So far so typical, except that the case was described in 1810 by John Haslam, the apothecary at the notorious ‘Bedlam’ – correctly the Bethlehem Hospital , the original lunatic asylum. This was the first ever full length clinical description of a single patient, one apparently suffering from delusions of control.
So was Matthews simply a lunatic? Bedlam staff said so, but two doctors declared him completely sane. It seems that Matthews was not incarcerated on medical grounds but on the orders of Lord Liverpool, the Home Office minister, who Matthews had accused of being part of a nefarious plot.
Matthews claimed he had been negotiating a peace settlement with France and had been betrayed. Oddly enough, some of Matthews’s story appears to be true; when his mission to Paris failed the French threw him into prison. He behaved quite sanely; in Bedlam Matthews learned architectural drawing, and drew up plans a new hospital building. The Governors gave him £30 for his work and some of the features of his design were incorporated into the new Bedlam. His family maintained he was eccentric but sane.
Haslam’s account of Matthews – “Illustrations of Madness: Exhibiting a Singular Case of Insanity…†was intended to prove that Matthews really was mad. But Matthews kept his own notes on his treatment, notes which found their way to a committee investigating Bedlam some time after his death. These undoubtedly influenced the committee's decision to dismiss Haslam and order that patients should be treated more humanely in future.
If Matthews was the victim of a plot, what about the infernal engine which afflicted him, the mind-control machine he called the Air Loom? According to Matthews, it sent out ‘invisible magnetic rays’ which influenced a magnet implanted in his head and produced many diagrams of it . We may fairly assume that this was a reflection of the fashionable interest in mesmerism and ‘animal magnetism’ of this period. The alternative is that he was trying to describe advanced technology in an age before the discovery electromagnetic radiation or the electrical nature of the nervous system - and that way surely lies madness.
The case has many parallels with the modern descriptions of 'gang stalking' recounted in Sharon's article and suggests that the situation is a complex one. And if bioelectromagnetic weapons ever actually reach the stage of being fielded, then simply labeling people who claim they are being targeted as 'crazy' will no longer be an option.
UPDATE 3:20 PM: These days lots of people are also worried about the effects of electromagnetic smog. Until scientists like the bioelectromagnetics researchers get to grips with this it will reamin with the fringe, like the makers of this anti-EM spray.
And for an musical last word, it's hard to beat this.
Just to update you all: last Sunday’s Washington Post Magazine published a cover story I’d been working on for the past number of months about an extremely large group of people who believe the government is targeting them as part of a "mind control" campaign.
I wrote a brief item here last weekend, and Noah suggested that I check back in a few days and post an update with the response to the article. Well, let’s just say life is an adventure, and the article has elicited strong reactions.
What response? Well, first there are the 75 or so blog entries related to the story, the online discussion and the nine full pages of comments appended to the Washington Post Magazine article, most from people who say they are victims of mind control. There are also some notable reactions here at Defense Tech; and my e-mail inbox (by the way folks, Gmail was wrong about "never deleting another e-mail" -- my account has hit its limit).
Reactions came at two extremes: There were a number of "TIs" (short for Targeted Individuals) who graciously thanked me for writing their story, and then there were skeptics who attacked the article for not concluding the TIs are all schizophrenics in need of medical help. My favorite comment from the Post's site was simply: “Good grief, Sharon, what have you done?!â€
I’ve often asked myself that same question.
There were a few people, however, who seemed to agree that whether the TIs' claims are true or false, there's something to be said about trying to understand why so many people believe the things they believe.
But for anyone who thinks that all TIs are mentally ill people in need of forced medication, I suggest you check out some of the extremely sane tactics they employ. For example, their organized response to the article would make some political campaigns jealous. As one mind control blog advises:
We must write the Washington Post in high numbers to show that this story merits a follow up. We must get our side of the story out, before the perps start inundating them with letters that we are crazy. Please take part in this to give the accurate side of what is really happening and remember to forward any supporting evidence.
There's also a few researchers raising a fascinating question in the medical literature:
One of the defining features of a delusion is that it should not be a belief "ordinarily accepted by other members of the person's culture or subculture". Nevertheless, some researchers have noted that there is no clear measure of what is 'ordinarily accepted'.
It is also possible that cultures or subcultures could be based around beliefs that would otherwise be diagnosed as delusional. Until now, however, there have been no obvious examples of such subcultures identified.
In the Psychopathology paper, ten websites reporting psychosis-like 'mind control' experiences were identified. The reports were anonymised and independently blind-rated by three psychiatrists who confirmed that they reflect experiences stemming from psychosis.
One final thought: Some of the documents I dug up through a Freedom of Information Act request indeed confirmed that the Air Force Research Laboratory patented a device to send sounds and voices into someone's head as a "psychological warfare tool."
So, I guess that begs the obvious question: even if you dismiss everyone who claims they are a victim of mind-invading technology, what do you think Pentagon plans to do with such a device?
For many years, national security experts, prominent scientists, and probably Dennis Kucinich, have received hundreds of e-mails that begin something like this: “I am surveilled, harassed and gangstalked everywhere I go 24/7/365.â€
I’ve certainly received them, and Defense Tech has gotten its fair share, too.
The letters typically state that the person is a victim of an organized mind control plot that involves weapons that beam voices into their head; shoot powerful pain rays at them; and often includes around-the-clock harassment and monitoring. One of the common claims is that the people are targeted by microwave weapons.
What do most people do with these letters? Defense writer William Arkinsays he hits the “delete†button when he gets those e-mails. Jon Ronson, author of the wonderfully wacky Men Who Stare at Goats has stated that mind control is an area that he doesn’t “want to get into.†(This from a gifted writer who interviewed a man who believes the world’s leaders are extraterrestrial lizards in disguise.)
What do I do with these letters? I read them, and this Sunday’s Washington Post Magazine has a cover story based on my nearly year-long investigation into their claims.
I try to raise what I think are some fascinating questions about the Pentagon’s involvement in microwave weapons and the auditory effect (which could be used to send sounds or voices into people’s heads).
As for whether there's any evidence that hundreds, if not thousands of people, are being targeted by microwave weapons, well, read for yourself.
America, it turns out, is suffering from a science and engineering shortage. Students are bypassing the sciences for sexier and more lucrative jobs...
This creates something of a national security problem... According to Dr. Barker, who works in the Air Force Office of Scientific Research, those who manage the national labs and others who conduct sensitive research have been saying for years "how hard it is to find qualified graduate students who are US citizens..."
Barker notes that 50 percent of America's scientific-and-engineering workforce will be eligible to retire in the next five years. Who's going to replace them?...
Hollywood... [may] be part of the solution. By writing and producing movies that have more scientific themes - and more authentic and appealing science protagonists - boosters think the US could encourage more young people to pursue careers in plasma physics, molecular biology, and other fields...
So what they've done for the past three years is convene a three-to-five-day screenwriting class at the venerated American Film Institute in Los Angeles. Called the Catalyst Workshop, it's a lot like other screenwriting classes that have become a cottage industry across the nation. But here's the twist - all participants in this one are actually scientists. Hardcore, PhD-laden, lab-certified scientists.
The military is paying closer attention to business... because the world of geopolitics has discovered itself to be on the same road that business has been on for some time. That road is flatter, more networked and more decentralized than ever.
Large companies are groping for strategies to fend off disruptive competitors, including YouTube, Kazaa, Skype and Wikipedia, companies that are giving away video, music, long-distance and information while eroding the revenue stream of companies that charge for it. YouTube is a website where users swap millions of free videos. With fewer than 100 employees, it has created anxiety throughout the giant industries of film and TV...
How large, traditional companies fare in this fight may prove invaluable in developing a strategy against al-Qaeda. That's why the military is going to school. A book making the rounds at the Pentagon is The Starfish and the Spider: The Unstoppable Power of Leaderless Organizations. It was written for a business audience, but military strategists are saying, "This is the best thing I've read that applies to counterterrorism," says Lt. Col. Rudolph Atallah, a Defense Department director in international affairs.
The premise of The Starfish and the Spider is that centralized organizations are like spiders and can be destroyed with an attack to the head. Decentralized organizations transfer decision-making to leaders in the field. They are like starfish. No single blow will kill them, and parts that are destroyed will grow back.
When Starfish co-author Rod Beckstrom arrived at USA TODAY's suburban Washington, D.C., headquarters for an interview in November, he said he had just come from meetings with representatives at the Pentagon and elsewhere in the "intelligence community." He said he was contacted "out of the blue" in September by one of the highest-ranking officers in special operations, and more recently by a high-ranking special operations officer at Fort Bragg, N.C.
We Get Letters: French Sub-Makers, UFO-Spotters
While we silly Americans were busy clinging to our neo-pagan rituals -- decorated trees! oil lamps! dropping balls! bowl games! -- the intrepid scientific truth-tellers of France were hard at work, spreading the word about their world-shaking discoveries. Two of these researchers graced me with their communiques in recent days. And I now share these remarkable messages with you:
=====================
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
=====================
Contact: XXXXXXXXX
UFOs Explained at Last
Anti-gravitation, propulsion of UFOs, crop circles, abductions have scientific proof
Since October 2003, over 6400 sightings of unidentified flying objects throughout the world have been reported, and, according to multiple surveys over the last several decades and from different countries, 5-7% of people report having seen a UFO - equivalent to 15-20 million Americans. But is there proof of such a thing? And what about other paranormal occurrences like crop circles, poltergeists, and even time travel? Author Eric Julien says there is science behind the paranormal and presents it in his breakthrough work, _The Science of Extraterrestrials: UFOs Explained at Last._ After more than 50 years of investigation, Julien posits that the fractal nature of time and its three dimensions led to the emergence of a revolutionary global theory: Absolute Relativity. Written for the layman but presented in a solidly scientific way,
_The Science of Extraterrestrials_ highlights the mistakes of science and will furthermore offer insight into extraterrestrial technology. In his book, Julien methodically covers the following:
Anti-gravitation
Propulsion of UFOs
Alien abductions
Formation of crop circles
Strange luminous phenomena
Poltergeists
Ghosts
Post mortem survival
Time travel
Praised by the international scientific community, _The Science of Extraterrestrials_ is "probably one of the best books of ufology from a scientific point of view," said Pascal di Scala, a French professor of mathematics.
About the Author: Eric Julien is a former fighter pilot trainee, a military air traffic controller, twin jet pilot in commercial aviation, station manager for an international airline company and airport manager in the great Parisian airports... He has had contact with extraterrestrials and shares in this body of work his understanding of the universe.
FWIW, I see that the French space agency will be "publish[ing] its archive of UFO sightings and other phenomena online." Maybe this monsieur's close encounters will be included.
---
from: XXXXXXXX
to: defense@noahshachtman.com
date: Jan 2, 2007 7:50 AM
subject: Sub sea innovative project for civil and Defense strategies.
We do register, as new start up French company, three patents for a very new system of absolute autonomous submarine drone, but more than that, an unlimited sized autonomous submarine *structure* available for all kinds of sea tasks, itself available as completed machine with embedded equipments for many different tasks.
French Marine Headquarter is seriously interested in, but financial conditions are not allowed to start this project. We would like to be known in many countries and by many possible partners in the world.
Meaddle East interlocutors are seriously interested by one version for drinkable water detection and captation for unlimited quantities, without pumping nor pipes at any depth (our technology), but we need strong partners to start and build a proptotype (around two millions Euros). Many options are already designed for Defense original solutions, as submarine rescue, heavy recovery, carrier ships protection, mine hunter or sleeping fire bases as coast undetectable patrolling units.
Would you tell us if you can help us to find contacts for business ?
This is truly the mother of all scoops. After months of clandestine meetings, Freedom of Information Act requests, and classified military computer hacks, Murdoc has finally discovered the wonder weapon that is guaranteed to turn the tide in Iraq. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you... the Urban Combat Patrol Tricycle!
We Get Letters: 'Sats Attacking My Brain'
It's actually been a while since I've been sent an e-mail this nutty. Can the Air Force's satellite hackers help out here?
Dear Sir,
Satellite Technology could be used on terrorist. If a terrorist is caught the "lasered" with Satellite technology then let go. That individual can be monitored 24/7/365 with out ever knowing that it is being done to him. Follow the rat back to the nest. If the "laser" that can shock the nervous system is also applied then that individual can be controlled to a certain extent. Sleep deprivation can be used and the shocking of the nervous system takes allot out of the individual. I know it is being used on me.
I am sending you this because I do not know who else to turn to. Satellite technology is being used on me. The only proof I have is other people hearing these people. My dentist, people at a coffee shop, barber, suppermarket, everywhere I go ect... I hoped that I was just mentally ill but when other people can hear them then it's not me. Me I am having sleep deprivation, shocking to my nervous system and other disruptive things being done to me utilizing this technology.
Video: Shark Spies Steered by "Squid Juice"
I'm sure you'll all remember that happy day last March, when word broke that a Darpa-funded scientist was looking for ways to turn sharks into "stealth spies." Now, thanks to the sharp-eyed SC, we can all check out a video of the shark training in action.
Back in the spring, I figured this research was in its earliest, most basic stages -- getting a sense of what makes a shark tick. Not so. Boston University professor Jelle Atema can actually "steer a shark" -- either through "electrical stimulation of the brain" or by delivering "little odor pulses" of "squid juice" to the predator's nose.
Atema's Darpa funding is done. So Atema is looking for more cash to better train his sharky posse. Maybe to "track ocean temperature changes," or the "spread of pollution," he says.
Meanwhile, "the military has... made the research classified, and it is now run out of the Naval Undersea Warfare Center," says a Boston University alumni newsletter. No word, yet, on whether the little buggers have frickin' lasers attached to their heads. But, surely, it can't be that far off.
The Sound of Rummy
We've all suspected for some time that our outgoing Defense Secretary is a very, very odd man. And that Fox News blowhard Cal Thomas is completely freakin' bonkers. There's further proof, after the jump, in this straight-outta-Wonderland exchange between the two. Julie Andrews, beware.
SEC. RUMSFELD: It's good to see you.
MR. THOMAS: When you get things, you know, straightened out, come down and see a movie with us. I promise it won't be a war movie.
SEC. RUMSFELD: What kind of a movie?
MR. THOMAS: We got a movie theater we kind of like in our house.
SEC. RUMSFELD: Oh, do you really?
MR. THOMAS: Yeah, we decided we're not leaving anything to the kids, so we're spending it on ourselves since I earned it.
SEC. RUMSFELD: Yeah, damn right. That's my answer. (Laughter.)
MR. THOMAS: (Laughs.) There you go. And so we have this nice movie theater with surround sound --
SEC. RUMSFELD: I've heard these home theaters -- you have chairs that --
MR. THOMAS: Oh, they're fun. Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah do that. You can sleep, you can do anything. It's very cool.
SEC. RUMSFELD: My wife --
MR. THOMAS: Juke box, all kinds of stuff.
SEC. RUMSFELD: My wife loves movies.
MR. THOMAS: Oh, good. Well --
SEC. RUMSFELD: She goes all the time with a group of women, and I have not been in six years to the movies.
MR. THOMAS: It'll be fun. I got one for you that'd you'd really love. You got it this Christmas. Get for her and watch it together. It's called "Akeelah and the Bee." Starbucks is involved in it. It's about a little African-American girl, 11-years-old, growing up in Crenshaw in LA... And they discover that she has this great gift of spelling. Laurence Fishburne is in it, Angela Basset. She goes out and redeems everybody... I'm sitting there I'm balling away. I'm cheering for the kid...
I guarantee you I'll give you your money back if you don't love this movie. You will absolutely love this. It's got everything. There's not a white guy -- the only white guy in it is the principal of the school. Everybody else is minority, everybody else gets along.
SEC. RUMSFELD: Did you like the "Sound of Music?"
MR. THOMAS: Of course I liked the "Sound of Music."
SEC. RUMSFELD: Well, so did I... People laugh at that.
MR. THOMAS: Well, I want to you something. I stalked Julie Andrews for 40 years before I finally got her.
SEC. RUMSFELD: Is that right.
MR. THOMAS: On our shelf, a picture of us having tea together in New York.
SEC. RUMSFELD: How long ago?
MR. THOMAS: Two years. But I --
SEC. RUMSFELD: She's showing her years.
MR. THOMAS: Yeah, well -- no, she looks great.
SEC. RUMSFELD: (Laughs.)
MR. THOMAS: I waited for her outside the Majestic Theater in 1962 in the rain. That's when it started... And that's how I opened the letter to her, you know. So anyway, you got more important things to do.
SEC. RUMSFELD: Good to see you.
MR. THOMAS: Good to you see you, and let's stay in touch.
SEC. RUMSFELD: Terrific.
MR. THOMAS: And come and see a movie. You will love that one, I guarantee it. Merry Christmas.
This teeny-tiny piece had more than its fair share of hilarious research moments. The best of 'em had to be when I stumbled across this zany Japanese promotional video for the wine-ager. Behold, as a cuter-than-cute cartooon grandpa gets his drink on, while a little girl blinks her giant eyes, and gets all golly-gee. Complete with an overdub that would make Godzilla proud.
Like the old man in the video says, "Mmmm. Well, let's start the consumption."
A few other interesting tidbits in the ish. Defense Tech pal Clive Thompson takes a look at the Boomerang 'Bot -- and eats a little DT dust in the process (which is fine, considering I wrote up one of his ideas last year). Jonathan Shainin takes note of the CIA's "Ziggurat of Zealotry," and the infamously-fictional "Rods from God" space weapon concept.
Mind Control, Prisoner Experiment Okays
Heads up, Navy scientists! If you want to perform "severe or unusual intrusions, either physical or psychological, on human subjects," you're going to need approval from the Under Secretary of the Navy.
According to a memo unearthed by Secrecy News, that goes for "consciousness-altering drugs or mind-control techniques," as well. Ditto for experiments on "prisoners" -- even though the document says earlier that "research involving any person captured, detained, held, or otherwise under the control of DoD personnel (military and civilian, or contractor employee) is prohibited." The UNDERSECNAV's thumbs-up is also required for human trials involving "potentially or inherently controversial topics (such as those likely to attract significant media coverage or that might invite challenge by interest groups)."
On the other hand, the Director of Defense Research and Engineering makes the call on "all proposed research involving exposure of human subjects to the effects of nuclear, biological or chemical warfare agents or weapons."
So keep that in mind.
Fighting Shadows: Military Holograms
In science fiction, holograms are realistic, moving three-dimensional images. (Remember Arnie being spooked by his mirror self in Total Recall, and the priceless line “Watch out, he’s got a hologram!â€). In the movies, if they flicker a bit ("Help me, Obi-Wan Kenobi..."), it’s just so the audience realises it’s a hologram and doesn’t get confused. Real life holograms are a lot more limited, so I was interested to see this study carried by Dr David Watt on Holograms As Nonlethal Weapons for NTIC, the Nonlethal Technology Innovations Center in New Hampshire.
This is a serious look at the technical possibilities for holograms. It’s a far cry from blue sky fantasies like the Air Force 2025 Airborne Holographic Projector which â€displays a three-dimensional visual image in a desired location, removed from the display generator†or the even more wildly optimistic “Hologram, Death: Hologram used to scare a target individual to death.â€
Real holograms will not fool people at short range and they do not move, nor can they be ‘projected’ into a remote location. But they might still have their uses.
One of Watt's suggested applications is 'deception in an urban environment'. Take a shop window and replace it with a hologram of a window display, and you have an apparently innocuous space where troops can be stationed without any hint of their presence. A vehicle (a car or bus) could use similar trompe l’oeil effect.
There is the possibility of using holograms to create ‘virtual forces’ or ‘virtual obstacles’, but the problems are all too apparent. The situation is much better indoors where the optical environment can be controlled. Dr Watt suggests installations could have virtual doors, walls and windows as ways of confusing or misleading intruders.
A more unusual approach is using a speckle hologram as ‘virtual smoke’. This type of hologram produces an image that appears to be in front of its real surface, and this could ‘project’ a confusing image of three-dimensional spots before their eyes, making it impossible for viewers to judge what is in front of them and how far away it is.
The human eye is difficult to fool, notes Dr Watt, but infra-red sensors are much less sophisticated – there is no need for the same level of colour fidelity. An infra-red hologram of a vehicle could make a very convincing decoy. Automated systems (such as missile guidance) with no humans to spot the flaws should be particularly easy to fool. However, as Watt points out the technology does not yet exist to create infra-red holograms.
It is the third dimension that makes holograms uniquely different to other means of camouflage and potentially valuable. During WWII, circles of black cloth were used to give the impression of bomb craters on runways after air raids, but these would not stand up to close inspection. Holograms would allow you to put realistic-looking ‘holes’ or craters on any surface and confuse any possible damage assessment.
Watt’s conclusion is “Fascinating, but…†–- there are just too many limitations at present. Size limits and material restrictions are a real problem, and
“Most NLT [non lethal technology] applications rely on psychological predisposition of belligerents.â€
In other words it will take a certain amount showmanship to set the illusion up in the first place; this may be feasible in Las Vegas, but not on the battlefield.
But perhaps the biggest stumbling block at present is the cost of holograms large enough for practical applications. Watt quotes $10,000 for a one metre by two hologram, or a hefty $200k for one metre by six metres, which is a lot of money – especially if the bad guys decide to test whether one is real by putting a bullet through it.
"The Deadlies," our contest to find the most insanely-dangerous gear of all time, is well under way. A bunch of folks have already posted their nominees. They're all brilliant. Take MOOSE ("Man Out of Space Easiest"), General Electric's one-man, orbital escape pod from the 1960's.
To use it, an astronaut first would don a spacesuit and remove the 200-pound packaged escape system from a large suitcase-sized container aboard the spacecraft.
Then the person would unfold a 6-foot-long bag made of clear Mylar plastic and step into one end of it.
Attached and bonded to the rear of the bag was an ablative heat shield about one-quarter inch (6.3 millimeters) thick. Inside the bag were two canisters of white polyurethane foam, a portable rocket motor with twin exhaust nozzles that protruded through the Mylar cover, a parachute, radio equipment and a survival kit.
Once inside the bag, the astronaut would don a harness, zip the bag closed and float out the hatch of the spacecraft.
Out in space the astronaut would activate the foam canisters, which would inflate the bag into the shape of a blunt cone within a few minutes.
Then the astronaut would orient the bag with the rocket motor so that the blunt end faced towards Earth. That way, atmospheric heat upon reentry would char only the heat shield.
Perhaps the engineers gained confidence from U.S. Air Force Capt. Joe Kittinger who made a couple of towering leaps from open-balloon gondolas during the late 1950s and early 1960s.
In one high-altitude test in August 1960, Kittinger jumped from a height of nearly 103,000 feet (31,395 meters) and free fell for more than four and a half minutes before his parachute opened. Kittinger even surpassed the speed of sound – the only human to do so without using an aircraft or space vehicle -- yet survived his 20-mile (32-kilometer) fall in remarkably good shape.
The reasoning followed that if one man survived such a drop, then others could as well from even higher altitudes.
Reader Steve Weintz starts us off with a fine, fine suggestion: the steampunk jetpack.
Resembling a cast-iron uterus with whirring, razor-sharp dentata more than a jetpack proper, Andreas Petzoldt has spent the last decade perfecting every rocket lad's dream on his own dime...
It hasn't been tested yet, but... it's hard not to imagine the test flight. With great ebullience, Andreas soars into the heavens. He sneers at gravity with contempt, a spurned mistress, a whore who embraces all but him. But suddenly he hears a horrifying choke and shudder and a sickening vertigo creeping up from his genitalia and into his bowels as he plummets back down to the ground, strapped to over 200 pounds of highly-explosive rocket fuel and whirring metal blades.
Throughout the ages, bad guys have loved bunkers, whether they're in Nazi Germany or Jihadist Iran. With good reason: the suckers are hard to find, and even tougher to blow up. Even the most bleeding-edge, experimental bunker-busters can penetrate, at most, 10 meters down.
Which is why the Air Force is considering a new approach: teams of foot-long "subterranean vehicles" with new-fangled ways to dig.
A subterranean vehicle could engage these types of targets in an effective manner, avoiding both collateral damage and unnecessary risks to our troops. It could be deployed a safe distance from the target and autonomously navigate itself to the target while detecting, identifying, and then avoiding buried obstacles such as pipes, wires, boulders and even other buildings. This vehicle would be able to penetrate the surface either through deployable techniques or on its own.
But "conventional digging techniques" will not get the job done, the Air Force warms. "It’s more likely that a revolutionary approach to digging, involving biologically inspired and/or unconventional physical and chemical approaches, would provide better results."
General Dynamics, for one, already has a digger, derived from nature: the Worm, a 30-inch long, two-and-a-half-inch-wide "combination of hydraulic packers and cylinders" designed to inch its way through soil. It's made to wiggle through 500 feet on earth in about 20 hours.
The Air Force thinks "a system of vehicles" could prove to be a better solution, however, with "each [machine] performing a different task."
Phase I of the "Subterranean Warfare" effort "should establish the ability to penetrate the surface and continue to navigate at least one meter below the surface." After that, it's time to "develop, test and demonstrate an operable prototype."
UPDATE 10:38 AM: Now, of course, conspiracy theorists and comic book fans will tell you that such diggers are almost laughably redundant. To fight underground, all you have to do is find one of the secretpassageways to the Hollow Earth, they'll say. And bring enough troops to deal with the Mole Men, naturally.
UPDATE 2:54 PM: Some of those kooky types might believe in Hollow Earth theories, David Hambling sniffs. But as any real, serious Mulder-in- training will tell you, the Air Force "already operates its own fleet of underground tunnelling machines, digging out all those secret bases to store all the UFOs and stuff." Why, just look at the evidence, to the left. I mean, there's no chance it could have anything to do with item #4 on this list.
Feds Flail Flying Saucer Friend
Yesterday's raids on the homes of Rep. Curt Weldon's daughter and pals is bad news for the Republican party, of course. But it's really, really bad news for the Russian flying saucer community, Wonkette reminds us -- pointing to one of my own dang articles.
Long before he started pushing kooky theories about Saddam's WMD and military data mining, Weldon -- a fluent Russian speaker -- was one a one-man quest to find jobs for former Soviet scientists and engineers. "It keeps them from otherwise working with the bad guys around the world," he told me, for a 2003 Wired News story.
The employment process seemed to begin by getting these Russian firms, like the Saratov aviation company, to hireWeldon's daughter as a lobbyist. Meanwhile, the Congressman would convince arms of the U.S. military to take on projects by the ex-Sovs.
In Saratov's case, Weldon was particularly impressed with "Ekip" -- a flying saucer, relying on vacuum shell for its lift.
"The fact that they had put together a full-scale prototype -- with very limited resources, because of the cutbacks in the military-industrial base -- that was remarkable to me," Weldon said.
So Weldon asked some folks at the U.S. Naval Air Systems Command, or NAVAIR, to take on the saucer project. The initial prototype was supposed to be 500 pounds -- just a speck compared with the 12-ton craft that Saratov claims to have successfully test flown in the early 1990s.
If memory serves, NAVAIR wound up abandoning the project after a while. And if Admiral Joe Sestak winds up beating Weldon in next month's election, it may be a very, very long time before the saucer takes flight.
"The challenge is that marijuana plants absorb energy, heat very readily. It's very difficult to penetrate with thermal devices. ... And as a result you really have to be careful that the Taliban don't dodge in and out of those marijuana forests," General Rick Hillier said in a speech in Ottawa, Canada.
"We tried burning them with white phosphorous -- it didn't work. We tried burning them with diesel -- it didn't work. The plants are so full of water right now ... that we simply couldn't burn them," he said.
Even successful incineration had its drawbacks.
"A couple of brown plants on the edges of some of those [forests] did catch on fire. But a section of soldiers that was downwind from that had some ill effects and decided that was probably not the right course of action," Hiller said dryly.
One soldier told him later: "Sir, three years ago before I joined the army, I never thought I'd say 'That damn marijuana'."
CIA's Wacky, Online 'Personality Quiz'
These are tough times for the Central Intelligence Agency. It's not just the blown calls on Iraq. Or the bruising turf battles with the White House. There's the series of internal purges. And, of course, the constant threat of another terrorist attack. No wonder the Agency is having trouble hiring good people.
But still, can things have grown so dire at Langley that the CIA has to resort to gimmicks like this wink-wink-trying-to-be-ironic-and-cool-but-instead-looking-even-more-dorky recruiting website
The "CIA personality quiz" is supposed to show how the Agency needs all types to function. So the exam offers up a series of questions, about your favorite leisure activities, the "kind of transportation you prefer," and what super power you'd like to have. And then the site tells you what kind of valuable asset to the CIA you'd be.
If the super power you want is flight, for example, and your dream is to climb Mt. Everest, according to the Agency, you're a "Daring Thrill Seeker." If you prefer shopping on Rodeo Drive and sunbathing on a yacht, that means you're a "Innovative Pioneer." If you'd like to have ESP and a designer wardrobe, that qualifies you as an "Impressive Mastermind." Naturally.
Somehow, this is all meant to dispel myths about what it's like to work for the Agency. Take Myth #1, for instance: "You’ll Never See Your Family and Friends Again." Au contraire, the site says. "The work we do may be secret, but that doesn’t mean your life will be. Because the variety of CIA careers is similar to that of any major corporation. So… your friends and family will still be part of your life."
Nor will your work be all that dangerous. "Car chases through the alleyways of a foreign city are common on TV, but they’re not what a CIA career is about. And, they don’t compare with the reality of being part of worldwide intelligence operations supporting a global mission."
And that grueling background check? Don't sweat it. "Because of our national security role, CIA applicants must meet specific qualifications — but, don’t worry. Getting caught smoking in high school isn’t enough to disqualify you. Your intellect, skills, experience and desire to serve the nation are most important to us."
Unless you're setting up Agency websites, I guess.
Saddam's Supergun
Saddam loved his defense technology -- the wackier, the better. Take "Baby Babylon," for instance: "an artillery piece so powerful that it could not only shell his enemies in Tel Aviv and Tehran but also fire a projectile into orbit," the Times reports.
“I would say that Saddam’s regime was not a model of rationality,†said John Pike, director of GlobalSecurity.org, a Washington-based organization that has studied Mr. Hussein’s weaponry. “He did in some respects share Hitler’s fascination with wonder weapons...â€
Mr. Hussein’s scientists could not satisfy his craving for wonder weaponry, although they tried often enough.
There was a reported program to create a “rail gun,†in which electromagnetic pulses would accelerate a projectile to high speeds, research on elaborate multistage rockets and re-entry vehicles, and, before 1991, endless tinkering with weird biological agents. None of it produced anything particularly useful...
Perhaps strangest of all were little Russian armored reconnaissance ground vehicles, somehow evoking Jetsons-style spaceships, made for just one occupant.
It sounds like something out of a comic book, or Lord of the Rings, I know. But there's a chance that invisibility – real-life, honest-to-God invisibility – may actually be possible, some day.
The technology doesn’t come from some dubious unknown inventor, but from Professor Sir John Pendry, the legendary theoretical physicist, I write in this month’s BBC Focus magazine – “the world's best science and technology monthly.†Pendry has developed the concept of metamaterials, which have properties determined by their structure rather than their composition. This can give them 'impossible' properties, such as a negative refractive index. Initially, there was some debate about whether this could ever be achieved. But the proof came last year with the demonstration of a superlens capable of beating any lens made of normal material.
By utilizing metamaterials, it should be possible, in theory, to create what Pendry calls an invisibility cloak -- although invisibility shell might be more accurate as it will need to be rigid. Such a cloak would divert any incident light around its surface and release it on the same path on the other side: to any observer the wearer is invisible.
Interestingly, Pendry’s work on metamaterials started when he was working for Marconi. He was looking at the application of carbon fiber for a stealth coating when he realized that its interaction with radar was determined by the length of the fibers – it was effectively acting as an array of tiny aerials – and that the same effect could have many other applications.
Invisibility in the optical spectrum will be challenging because metamaterials will need to be constructed on a scale corresponding to the wavelengths of visible light, which is just a few hundred nanometres. That technology will not be around for at least five years.
But radar invisibility is much easier because radar wavelengths are in the centimeter range. Pendry’s colleague, Dr. David R. Smith at Duke University, is already working on a microwave metamaterial. Results are expected within eighteen months.
Unlike existing stealth techniques, a metamaterial should in principle be able to make an aircraft (or missile) literally invisible to any radar from any aspect.
There are likely to be other metamaterials along later. As Pendry explained, they can have all sorts of mechanical or acoustic properties as well as affecting light or other radiation. But for the mean time, we are likely to have out hands full just thinking of applications for invisibility.
The biggest question is likely to be the width of spectrum that any given material can handle. According to Pendry, a sufficiently deep metamaterial should be able to cope with a very wide spectrum. This might include all visible wavelengths plus a chunk of infra-red and UV. However, it’s clear that even very limited invisibility could be a major military asset.
Question: Can you go to jail for a plot involving imaginary weapons?
Answer: Yes, but it's not clear if the charges will stick.
In 2005, Ronald Grecula, a would-be inventor, hatched a harebrained plan to build a fusion bomb that violated the laws of physics. He was arrested in Texas after he pitched the idea to undercover FBI agents. The bomb, Grecula said, used light to activate a hydrogen-chlorine solution, which somehow produced fusion. Hmmm.
Dutiful journalists ran the idea by scientists, who were dubious that the scheme could destroy city blocks, as Grecula claimed. (The fact that Grecula was nutty doesn't mean he was original, by the way. The idea of a light-activated hydrogen-chlorine engine appears to be first imagined by Robert Scragg of West Virginia.)
Result: Grecula, who pleaded innocent, has been in jail since May of 2005. New charges have recently been added to his indictment.
Now, over in the United Kingdom, three suspects were recently let go after a British court rejected claims that they broke the law when they allegedly attempted to buy something called red mercury, a nasty substance rumored to be, among other things, fuel for a dirty bomb. The best thing about red mercury, however, is it doesn't exist. And the whole plot was set up by a tabloid hoping to score an expose of terrorism.
Result: The trio was set free.
More recently, you have the bumbling boobs in Miami who dreamed about blowing up the Sears Tower. They never even quite got around to the imaginary weapons part, according to the Washington Post.
Result: Indicted.
Now, it's easy say that even if these were fools, they were dangerous fools. But in all these cases, it wasn't even that the ideas were half-baked, but that the law enforcement efforts required to even make their plots look credible were amusing.
For Grecula, the FBI flew him down to Texas to hear him babble about needing to buy fusion bomb materials from the local hardware store. The FBI kicked in money for office space for the Miami gang. As for the red mercury guys, it's not even clear the would-be purchasers even thought they were buying something that was dangerous.
I suppose what's troubling in these cases is the concern that law enforcement agencies can't or won't differentiate between real weapons that can be relatively simple, but lethal (box-cutters, bombs using fertilizer) and attention-grabbing imaginary weapons that pose little threat to anyone.
P.S. While Wikipedia has its problems, I have to say, if you want any evidence of how hysterically bad About.com is, check out their explanation by the "expert" on red mercury.
It ain't easy, picking out evil-doers in the urban canyons of the Middle East; there are so many places to hide. Taking 'em out can be even harder, what with all those noncombatants hanging nearby. But the Air Force thinks it might have an answer to this most vexing problem in counter-insurgency: frisbees.
Not just any frisbees, mind you. Robotic frisbees. Heavily armed robotic frisbees.
"The 3-D maneuverability of the Frisbee-UAV [unammned aerial vehicle] will provide revolutionary tactical access and lethality against hostiles hiding in upper story locations and/or defiladed behind obstacles," the company promises.
The circular drones will be lanuched "from munitions dispensers or by means of a simple mechanism similar to a shotgun target (skeet) launcher," Triton adds. Once in the air, they'll be tele-operated by soldiers on the ground. Or, if needed, the fightin' frisbees will pilot themselves as they hunt for guerrillas.
Once they catch up to the baddies, the drones will use a series of armor-piercing explosives, shooting jets of molten metal, to eliminate their targets. And these MEFP [Multiple Explosively Formed Penetrator] "warheads will be controllable so as to provide a single large fragment (bunker-buster) or tailorable pattern of smaller fragments (unprotected infantry or light utility vehicles)." The decision of whether to go bunker-buster or infantry-annihilator mode can either be determined by the drones' human operators, "or autonomous target classification routine built into the UAV."
"The Frisbee disc has proven its potential on the sports field as a platform for short free-flights," Potts wrote back in an '01 paper. Without "predefined flight orientation," a Frisbee drone "offers novel flight characteristics and manoeuvrability. It is potentially suitable for a variety of mission objectives fulfilling surveillance, communications, munitions and/or airborne radar warning systems."
These days, Potts is focusing less on Frisbee-shaped robots -- and more on Frisbee competitors. "In recent years Jonny has applied his scientific knowledge to develop a range of sports discs with improved aerodynamic performance," says the website of his new company, which makes a line of "super-durable" spinners for $16 apiece. Explosives and robotic controls are not included.
How to Rate a (Possibly) Stupid Weapon Idea
If you follow the fascinating history of Metal Storm, the Australian company that built a weapon that can shoot a “million rounds a minute,†you might want to check out this story in Australia’s Sydney Morning Herald on their latest trials and tribulations. (If you’re not familiar with their history, you can check out my very long article with sidebars in the September/October 2005 issue of Defense Technology International.)
I’m going to write a longer post on the company next week, but this news got me thinking on whether there’s a way to predict bad and/or stupid weapons. Now, I’m not saying Metal Storm is a bad or stupid weapon, I’m just saying that it would be great if there were some way to guess ahead of time which ideas are really bad, and which are just a little silly.
In giving some thought to this issue, I’ve created the rating system below — this is still a work in progress (and some credit clearly goes to the crackpot index) — but I think it’s a good starting point.
For suggestions or additions, please leave comments below (or if you prefer, e-mail me at sharonweinberger[at]gmail.com). I’m going to need to run a few possibly stupid weapons through this rating system to get an idea of how the scoring works.
And before anyone gets up in arms (yes, a bad cliche), PLEASE NOTE THIS IS A SLIDING SCALE. For example, Metal Storm has indeed built working prototypes, and I’ve met some really bright military engineers who love to make references to Star Trek. Just look at this system as a reality check.
Enjoy!
How to rate a possibly stupid weapons idea:
1) Promises a “revolution in warfare.â€
Add 50 points. Add 25 points for claims of a “new arms race.†Add 5 points for each time any derivative of the word “transformation†is used in promotional materials describing the weapon.
2) Is supposedly based on a “new†innovation, yet on closer examination, there are myriad examples of attempts using similar ideas in the past.
Add 10 points for each case of a similar idea in the past. Add another 15 points, for each case inventor/company was unaware of this earlier attempt, and thus failed to learn from past mistakes.
3) Lacks a realistic operational scenario of where or how such a weapon could be used.
Add 25 points. Add 15 points if inventor/company describes an operational scenario, but it has no relation to current warfare (i.e. aircraft equipped with laser beams shooting at each other).
4) The usability of the weapon assumes as yet unproven leaps in technology to reduce size, power generation or other critical elements.
Add 15 points for each needed technological advance.
5) The idea comes from someone who is unfamiliar with how the military fights and how weapons are used.
Add 15 points (this is slightly subjective, so add only five points if served in military, but never involved in any military operations). Add 20 points if military experience is derived from watching war movies or the evening news.
6) The company/inventor relies on obtaining funding (private or public) from people who themselves have no idea how the military uses weapons (i.e. private investors, congressional earmarks).
Add 20 points if developmental funding relies on congressional earmarks (as opposed to funds requested in the Pentagon’s budget). Add 25 points if developmental funding relies on publicly traded stock. Add 30 points for developmental funding from intelligence agencies.
7) Incorporates references to and/or inspiration from Star Trek, Star Wars, Buck Rogers, or video games.
Add 10 points for Star Trek, 5 points for Star Wars, 3 points for Buck Rogers, and 2 points for video games (regardless whether XBox or Playstation II).
8) Inventor/company argues that people also once doubted the feasibility of a nuclear weapon, as if that automatically means that this weapon will work and/or is deserving of nearly unlimited funding.
Add 25 points. Also add 20 points if similar references are made to the Wright Brothers and airplanes.
9) Claims foreign countries are working hard on this technology, and could overtake the United States if we don’t invest in it (without proof of such work).
Add 10 points for claiming Russia is working on the same type of weapons, 20 points for China, 30 points for North Korea, and 5 points for the French. Score extra 100 points if claim is that extraterrestrial life forms are working on it (in fact, stop now if that’s the case – trust me, that’s a stupid weapon).
10) Claims foreign governments have contacted inventor/company about buying the weapon and/or idea (but with no actual sales).
Add 10 points.
11) Relies on PowerPoint in lieu of engineering details to demonstrate workability.
Add 5 points for each cartoon depiction of technology not yet in existence.
12) References to previous military funding as proof the idea is valid, because we all know the military only funds things that work.
Add 5 points.
13) When presented with possible scientific laws that the weapon – as proposed – might violate, inventor/company simply insists the weapon works, and it’s up to the scientists to explain how.
Add 35 points.
14) Cost of the weapon (please include nonrecurring costs if the weapon doesn’t yet exist), exceeds that of similar one currently in inventory by a factor of 10.
Add 20 points for each factor of 10. Add another 5 points if you assert that costs will come down with mass production without being able to cite evidence for demand and/or how much those costs would be reduced.
15) Any proof the weapon works is openly paraded to the media, but questions about problems with the weapon are rebuffed by claims that the information is “classified†or “proprietary.â€
As yet another Phil K Dick book gets the Hollywood treatment – A Scanner Darkly is out now , joining Blade Runner, Minority Report, Total Recall and the rest, I have a piece in online magazine Nth Position looking at the great man’s capability as a predictor of future military technology.
The article pits his book The Zap Gun - set in the futuristic world of 2004 - against Robert Heinlein’s Starship Troopers. Heinlein was a Navy man and aeronautical engineer; Dick was a self-confessed “flipped-out freak" with a long history of drug abuse and little knowledge of technical matters.
The result might come as a surprise: the number of hits that PKD scores is impressive, even with ideas that much have seemed deliberately absurd at the time, while Heinlein’s serious projections from then-current technology fail spectacularly. You might not want to take it all too seriously, but there's some food for thought.
Especially when The Zap Gun features an electronic publication called Wep Week, devoted to pictures and specs of new weapon systems and with its own devoted -- if occasionally obsessive -- readership.
Did Dick really gets his information from a pink laser beam projected into his brain by an alien intelligence, as he apparently believed? Or is it just that having a seriously far-out imagination is a major asset? You don’t have to be crazy to anticipate military technology, but it certainly seems to help.
So, last month, I was doing what it seems like I do for about 80 percent of my working life--standing in an ice-cold exhibit hall at a defense conference, chatting with another defense reporter. We were in Washington, D.C. at the Office of Naval Research’s annual science and technology conference, which featured an entire day devoted to alternative energy.
“The cold fusion booth,†I replied. “There are naval folks here presenting cold fusion.â€
“No, no, that’s not possible. This is a reputable conference,†scoffed the other reporter.
I pointed to the booth and told him to go over and check it out for himself. He came back toting some books and shaking his head in amazement. Personally, I kept my distance, as I’ve had my fill these past few months with the far reaches of science [For the record, I admire the Office of Naval Research’s open-minded approach to cold fusion scientists--and I remain sympathetic to researchers in the field, but it’d be nice to see something other than promises and old reports.]
What was amazing for me, however, was not that there was a cold fusion booth at the naval conference, but that the cold fusion booth was about the only one there dedicated to energy issues. For all the talk of its commitment to alternative energy, the Pentagon doesn’t appear to be taking steps to support spending on basic science and technology that could lead to breakthroughs. Forget basic science, even more advanced technology efforts, like hybrid vehicles, appear stalled, this month's National Defense magazine reports.
There’s some work around the edges---fuel cells and solar energy, as a recent issue of Defense Technology International noted. But there's no concerted effort. One could argue that the Defense Department isn’t really the place to do energy research, but the Pentagon has deeper pockets than the National Science Foundation and better luck with innovation and high-risk endeavors than the stodgy Department of Energy. The Pentagon also has innate self interest, as the country’s single largest consumer of fuel. A well-funded, scientifically sound approach to energy research could have big payoffs for the military.
Or it would at least offer something better than a lonely couple booths at a trade show.
From the halls of Montezuma to Inchon to Fallujah, the United States Marine Corps have proved themselves to be the meanest, toughest, most resourceful warriors on the planet.
Now, a single test remains for this hallowed assemblage of fighters:
Make a rich, smooth Cabernet Sauvignon.
Fortunately, the former Marines at Firestone Vineyards are meeting the challenge, by producing "Jarhead Red."
The wine is "a robust, full-bodied Cabernet Sauvignon. It was aged in French oak barrels for eight months. It offers flavors of plum, cassis and black currant with fine tannins on the finish," according to Firestone's website. "Jarhead Red is available in 750ml (the Rifleman) and 1.5L (the Sergeant). Occassional availability on larger formats including 3.0L (the Sergeant Major) and 5.0L (the Commandant)."
Third-generation wine grower Adam Firestone (CAPT 1984-91) and vineyard foreman Ruben Dominguez (SGT USMC 1979-84) came up with the Cabernet in "in 1999 as a celebratory bottling for the annual Marine Corps Scholarship Foundation Birthday Ball in Los Angeles," Firestone explains. "Over the years, the wine gained a following by word of mouth and was enjoyed at Birthday Balls around the country. To meet this growing demand, the wine was released for distribution, with net proceeds benefiting the Marine Corps Scholarship Foundation."
And, before you ask, Adam Firestone wants to be clear: "There is no affiliation between the wine and the movie 'Jarhead.'" Instead, according to a press release, He created Jarhead Red [to] fortify his loyalty to the Marine Corps and [to] extend it to his
Los Angeles Police 
So far so typical, except that the case was described in 1810 by John Haslam, the apothecary at the notorious ‘Bedlam’ – correctly the 
I wrote a 
I’ve certainly received them, and Defense Tech has gotten its 
The Air Force is 
It's actually been a while since I've been sent an e-mail this nutty. Can the Air Force's 
I'm sure you'll all remember that happy day last March, when word broke that a Darpa-funded scientist was looking for ways to turn sharks into "
We've all 
Heads up, Navy scientists! If you want to perform "severe or unusual intrusions, either physical or psychological, on human subjects," you're going to need approval from the Under Secretary of the Navy.
Reader Steve Weintz starts us off with a fine, fine suggestion: the 
Which is why the Air Force is considering a new approach: teams of foot-long "
UPDATE 10:38 AM: Now, of course, conspiracy theorists and comic book fans will tell you that such diggers are almost laughably redundant. To fight underground, all you have to do is find one of the 
Long before he started pushing kooky theories about 
"The challenge is that marijuana plants absorb energy, heat very readily. It's very difficult to penetrate with thermal devices. ... And as a result you really have to be careful that the Taliban don't dodge in and out of those marijuana forests," General Rick Hillier said in a speech in Ottawa, Canada.
Not just any frisbees, mind you. Robotic frisbees. Heavily armed robotic frisbees.
I’m going to write a longer post on the company next week, but this news got me thinking on whether there’s a way to predict bad and/or stupid weapons. Now, I’m not saying Metal Storm is a bad or stupid weapon, I’m just saying that it would be great if there were some way to guess ahead of time which ideas are really bad, and which are just a little silly.
Now, a single test remains for this hallowed assemblage of fighters:
