Talk about a LOAD of work. This is a very comprehensive com PILE ation of what I would think is statistically , if not impossible, at least improbable,to justify without pointing to a Hidden Hand. Now, I know, some of the dates are a bit of a stretch. I have no idea how "Sloppy" They will allow themselves to get when they are reaching for a Number:Re: The Fireman Bobs helmet number adding up to a Good Number. I dont know about SOme of this stuff, But As for the ONLY runway at Canaveral,Runway 33, well, thats the compass heading. COULD they have called it Runway 15? Yep,,Why did they build it at that heading anyway? If the prevailing winds arent from one end of that runway, they seriously did want it so they could name it what they wanted,Unless they Just couldnt find a piece of land that would allow them to build a runway of sufficient length & use prevailing winds. Anyway, I am not done reading. I come away appreciative of the work. I think some of it should have been culled. The weakest points, the hardest stretches, just detract from the solid evidence & allow the Willfully Blind to point at the weak points & scoff at the whole thing.So much labor should be more usable to open eyes, yet I believe its loaded with "Incriminating Dates" that, while I personally CAN accept,I know the Sheople who want to remain ignorant will look at those dates( The ones that require adding up too many numbers to Get to the Magic Number) & dismiss them. I CAN accept it, but I too tend to dismiss some of these. Why? I doint KNOW how "They" work the numbers.Some of these just seem too disjointed to amout to anything & I think they detract from what could be a more solid piece. The implication on Runway 33 & the omission of How Runways get their Designation would lead people to believe Runway 33 is a Big Deal, since they have exactly 1 runway, not 33,,but thats just not true & that detracts from the strength of the article. This is a case of Les Izmore'.