In article
<8bd5dc0f-caa8-4107-8017-12ced246c7fb@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
jerry <electrician@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On Apr 14, 10:23 am, You <y...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > In article
> > <e5998a2f-5522-4adb-ab8f-8c8d0c6bd...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
> >
> > jerry <GeraldCNew...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > > The aircraft producing the sonic booms were not in existence when
the
> > > trans-Alaska pipeline or the North Pole refinery was designed and
> > > built. So how could they be designed to withstand these types of
> > > sonic booms? This question is so obvious I am surprised that your
> > > brilliant mind did not catch it.
> >
> > Jerry, you are way to sheltered....... Sonny, there have been
> > Supersonic Aircraft flying over Alaska since the early 60's...
> > where have you been...under a Rock......
>
> Oh really, F22's have been flying over Alaska since the 1960's. How
> enlightening.
It would seem that Old Jerry has a READING comprehension problem....
He stated "The aircraft producing the sonic booms were not in existence
when the trans-Alaska pipeline or the North Pole refinery was designed
and built."
Then I stated "Sonny, there have been Supersonic Aircraft flying over
Alaska since the early 60's..."
Now just "Where" in the above was a specific "Type" of aircraft,
Mentioned, other than "Supersonic" of which there have BEEN many,
flying over Alaska, since the early 60's? It does TAKE a Supersonic
Aircraft, or Object, to create a Sonic Boom. That is a Scientific Given.
But nowhere in the above, does it REQUIRE a specific Airframe, or
Aircraft to generate these Sonic Booms, or that these specific Sonic
Booms, are different, or more energetic than any previous Sonic Booms,
experienced in the area, in prior years.
Your hole is getting deeper Jerry.......
|
