There are weak bonding compounds that can easily store it. This has been around since the 1960s. I'm not buying the "notoriously difficult to store" bit. We are constantly reminded of the Hindenburg disaster to scare us of the dangers of hydrogen. It's a constant theme. We now know the Hindenburg disaster was not an accident, but sabotage.
To be fair, what started the fire for the Hindenburg wasn't the Hydrogen, it was the doping compound being overly flammable. The Hydrogen just made it worse.
That goes along precisely with the PsyOp explanation of an accident due to the so-very "dangerous" hydrogen. The same scare mongering was used to ban Borax in Australia. As natural salt that is safer than table salt. Regarding the Hindenberg, there were 22 photographers present at 7 p.m. May 6, 1937 to film the Hindenburg's arrival. This seems like overkill for an event which had already occurred some 20 times in the previous year at the same field without incident. So why would this typical New Jersey airship landing require 22 separate photographers, five of whom were newsreel photographers?
The Hindenburg was behind schedule by exactly 12 hours. It was supposed to land at 7 am. Both the captain and first officer admitted they were wary of a possible bomb attempt because of tensions with Germany. Sabotage was a serious possibility in those days, yet it was not to be mentioned by the press after the "accident".
Everybody knows what supposedly happened. But not one of the photographers caught the actual "spark" that led to the "explosion". There was plenty of footage of a large fireball above the airship with a portion of the outer skin opened up. There was footage of the poor souls trying to get away from the burning wreckage. But no one caught the spark.
It was the most extraordinary "missed-the-shot" photographic blunder of all time.
The biggest problem with the Hindenburg explosion scenario is that Hydrogen, by itself, separated from oxygen as in a sealed gas cell (Hindenburg had 16 separate cells) does not burn. Hydrogen and oxygen need to be combined stoichiometrically. You would take a sample of water, convert it into a gas thus composing two parts hydrogen to one part oxygen. This burns with about seven times the amount of energy than an equal weight of petroleum. But only pure hydrogen was in the Hindenburg.
Blatantly striking a match inside a hydrogen fuel cell would do nothing at all except immediately go out (as soon as the oxygen, in solid oxide form, contained within the match head powder was exhausted.) If a static spark ignited Hindenburg, it would have started burning on the outside of the ship's skin where air containing oxygen could have mixed with the hydrogen escaping from a small leak. Even if there was a static electricity spark, as had never occurred in 30 years of successful operation, how would a flame requiring oxygen burn it's way inside the gas cell where there is no oxygen?
The Hindenburg had instruments that would detect and transmit the slightest changes in gas pressure to the bridge, so any sizable leak would have caused a pressure drop almost immediately and would have been detected.
The pilots would have delayed getting close to any structures and sought to correct the problem. If a spark had then occurred in this split section time window, then we would have seen a small flame on the outside skin burning like the head of a small gas torch where the hole was. But no way could this flame have gone inside the cell, and no way were there any makings of a bomb or explosion there.
Another very large problem with the story of the Hindenburg disaster: The seven year performance of the Graf Zeppelin. This amazing airship proceeded the Hindenburg. Amongst Graf Zeppelin's many incredible aviation feats was her non-stop flight around the world in 1929 carrying 20 passengers! Passenger service using piston driven aircraft did not even offer New York to Paris service until 1939.
Over seven years, Graf Zeppelin logged more than 1,000,000 miles, carried 18,000 passengers in safety and comfort, and made 144 successful Atlantic crossings. Graf Zeppelin used only hydrogen as the lifting material.
Airships are a simple form of anti-gravitation. They are much more efficient for transporting people and cargo than piston driven and modern day aircraft which have to lift such heavy fuel loads and plow through the air to keep them aloft. With a streamlined blimp all one does is cast off a line and let the airship rise. Upon reaching a height of about 500 feet, the engines are started and away they go, like a ship floating in water.
Airship use should have been expanded and continued, but that they were shutdown in favor of inefficient winged aircraft which today consume ungodly amounts of petroleum kerosene, otherwise known as high priced jet fuel.
In 1948, Gestapo Chief Heinrich Muller told his CIA interrogator James Kronthal that the Hindenburg was sabotaged, but they never caught the instigator.
There were 6,057 inventions that were under Secrecy Orders at the end of Fiscal Year 2022. For secrecy orders issued by year see website. The number of secrecy orders have only increased each year. This is technology that is rarely ever released from it's gag order. Tracking of secrecy orders can be found here. In the last 5 years, inventions that were under secrecy orders at the end of Fiscal Year 2018 were 5792. In 2019 it 5878, In 2020, it was 5915, and In 2021, it was 5976 secrecy orders.
“The dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts, far outweigh the dangers that are cited to justify them. There is a very grave danger that an announced need for an increased level of security will be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of censorship and concealment. That I do not tend to permit, so long as it’s in my control.” – JFK (source)
Under the Invention Secrecy Act of 1951, patent applications on new inventions can be subject to secrecy orders restricting their publication if government agencies believe that disclosure would be “detrimental to the national security.” The so-called areas which the government deems “sensitive”? These include smartphones, internet-enablers and a whole gamut of technology. Dr Gerald F. Ross invented an anti-electromagnetic-transmissions-jammer and had to wait nearly four decades before it got approved. In the interim, who knows what kind of info the Department of Defense managed to glean from it.
The current list of technology areas that is used to screen patent applications for possible restriction under the Invention Secrecy Act is not publicly available and has been denied under the Freedom of Information Act. (An appeal is pending.) But a previous list dated 1971 and obtained by researcher Michael Ravnitzky is available here pdf.
Most of the listed technology areas are closely related to military applications. But some of them range more widely.
In 1971, under US government secrecy orders on page 14 solar pholtaic cell technology is subject to review and possible restriction if patents for solar photovoltaic generators were more than 20% efficient. Energy conversion systems were likewise subject to review and possible restriction if they offered conversion efficiencies “in excess of 70-80%.” The world has since improved solar panel efficiency to 25%… And some scientists from the land down under have come up with solar panels that up to 46% efficient. Who knows how much faster we’d have gotten there if the US government did not try so hard to keep quite so many secrets to itself, or how much slower if it had been American scientists filing those patents. For over 12 years, the Ford Motor Company has sold in Europe the Ford Focus that gets 80 mpg. It’s not authorized here in the United States. It’s not the only manufacturer that sells much higher mpg vehicles in Europe. Yet, there are more technologies in the field of energy that the public at large will ever be allowed to use personally. The world plan appears to be Klaus Schwabb’s view of it. You will own nothing and be happy.
Regarding suppressed technologies, the question needing to be asked is if disclosure of such technologies could really be “detrimental to the national security,” or whether the opposite would be closer to the truth? I suspect the latter. This question would then leads us to the next logical question of what comparable advances in technology may be subject to restriction and non-disclosure today? No answers have been forthcoming, and the invention secrecy system persists with no discernible external review.
Under the Invention Secrecy Act of 1951, secrecy orders may be imposed on patent applications when a government agency finds that granting the patent and publishing it would be “detrimental” to national security.
The U.S. Patent office is place to which ongoing corruption occurs. It appears the Rothschild banking cartel has gained complete control of it. I am not exaggerating this either. I believe that Serco is running that shit show. The USPO outsources the examination of patent applications to outside companies, such as ‘Global Patent Solutions’.
Interesting, I found that it was cellulose acetate butyrate with aluminum powder. Not flamable like the rocket scientists theory, but leaves a nice metalic look while making the covering weather tight and resistant to impacts (hail stones?)
What is little-known about the Hindenburg was that the fabric covering was painted with an aluminum and iron-oxide based paint. These are coincidentally the ingredients of thermite. Any kind of spark would be capable of lighting it off and it would proceed rapidly across the covering, as indeed the photography shows. The destruction of the covering would mean loss of hydrogen and the airship would founder, as it did, with the released hydrogen being consumed in flames above.
Airships are lovely...but they are slow. Maybe several times as fast as an ocean liner. Airplanes were already much faster by that time.
That was what I was referring to as the doping compound. However the Doping compound on the Hindenburg was cellulose acetate butyrate mixed with aluminum powder of which is not a flamable compound. The source of this rumor comes from a rocket scientist referring to the usage of the aluminum powder often used in solid fuel rockets.
There are weak bonding compounds that can easily store it. This has been around since the 1960s. I'm not buying the "notoriously difficult to store" bit. We are constantly reminded of the Hindenburg disaster to scare us of the dangers of hydrogen. It's a constant theme. We now know the Hindenburg disaster was not an accident, but sabotage.
To be fair, what started the fire for the Hindenburg wasn't the Hydrogen, it was the doping compound being overly flammable. The Hydrogen just made it worse.
That goes along precisely with the PsyOp explanation of an accident due to the so-very "dangerous" hydrogen. The same scare mongering was used to ban Borax in Australia. As natural salt that is safer than table salt. Regarding the Hindenberg, there were 22 photographers present at 7 p.m. May 6, 1937 to film the Hindenburg's arrival. This seems like overkill for an event which had already occurred some 20 times in the previous year at the same field without incident. So why would this typical New Jersey airship landing require 22 separate photographers, five of whom were newsreel photographers?
The Hindenburg was behind schedule by exactly 12 hours. It was supposed to land at 7 am. Both the captain and first officer admitted they were wary of a possible bomb attempt because of tensions with Germany. Sabotage was a serious possibility in those days, yet it was not to be mentioned by the press after the "accident".
Everybody knows what supposedly happened. But not one of the photographers caught the actual "spark" that led to the "explosion". There was plenty of footage of a large fireball above the airship with a portion of the outer skin opened up. There was footage of the poor souls trying to get away from the burning wreckage. But no one caught the spark.
It was the most extraordinary "missed-the-shot" photographic blunder of all time.
The biggest problem with the Hindenburg explosion scenario is that Hydrogen, by itself, separated from oxygen as in a sealed gas cell (Hindenburg had 16 separate cells) does not burn. Hydrogen and oxygen need to be combined stoichiometrically. You would take a sample of water, convert it into a gas thus composing two parts hydrogen to one part oxygen. This burns with about seven times the amount of energy than an equal weight of petroleum. But only pure hydrogen was in the Hindenburg.
Blatantly striking a match inside a hydrogen fuel cell would do nothing at all except immediately go out (as soon as the oxygen, in solid oxide form, contained within the match head powder was exhausted.) If a static spark ignited Hindenburg, it would have started burning on the outside of the ship's skin where air containing oxygen could have mixed with the hydrogen escaping from a small leak. Even if there was a static electricity spark, as had never occurred in 30 years of successful operation, how would a flame requiring oxygen burn it's way inside the gas cell where there is no oxygen?
The Hindenburg had instruments that would detect and transmit the slightest changes in gas pressure to the bridge, so any sizable leak would have caused a pressure drop almost immediately and would have been detected.
The pilots would have delayed getting close to any structures and sought to correct the problem. If a spark had then occurred in this split section time window, then we would have seen a small flame on the outside skin burning like the head of a small gas torch where the hole was. But no way could this flame have gone inside the cell, and no way were there any makings of a bomb or explosion there.
Another very large problem with the story of the Hindenburg disaster: The seven year performance of the Graf Zeppelin. This amazing airship proceeded the Hindenburg. Amongst Graf Zeppelin's many incredible aviation feats was her non-stop flight around the world in 1929 carrying 20 passengers! Passenger service using piston driven aircraft did not even offer New York to Paris service until 1939.
Over seven years, Graf Zeppelin logged more than 1,000,000 miles, carried 18,000 passengers in safety and comfort, and made 144 successful Atlantic crossings. Graf Zeppelin used only hydrogen as the lifting material.
Airships are a simple form of anti-gravitation. They are much more efficient for transporting people and cargo than piston driven and modern day aircraft which have to lift such heavy fuel loads and plow through the air to keep them aloft. With a streamlined blimp all one does is cast off a line and let the airship rise. Upon reaching a height of about 500 feet, the engines are started and away they go, like a ship floating in water.
Airship use should have been expanded and continued, but that they were shutdown in favor of inefficient winged aircraft which today consume ungodly amounts of petroleum kerosene, otherwise known as high priced jet fuel.
In 1948, Gestapo Chief Heinrich Muller told his CIA interrogator James Kronthal that the Hindenburg was sabotaged, but they never caught the instigator.
This, simple form of antigravity is what we should be using for long distance trips. Until the aliens give us the really good tech.
Technology is being withheld from the American public.
There were 6,057 inventions that were under Secrecy Orders at the end of Fiscal Year 2022. For secrecy orders issued by year see website. The number of secrecy orders have only increased each year. This is technology that is rarely ever released from it's gag order. Tracking of secrecy orders can be found here. In the last 5 years, inventions that were under secrecy orders at the end of Fiscal Year 2018 were 5792. In 2019 it 5878, In 2020, it was 5915, and In 2021, it was 5976 secrecy orders.
“The dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts, far outweigh the dangers that are cited to justify them. There is a very grave danger that an announced need for an increased level of security will be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of censorship and concealment. That I do not tend to permit, so long as it’s in my control.” – JFK (source)
Under the Invention Secrecy Act of 1951, patent applications on new inventions can be subject to secrecy orders restricting their publication if government agencies believe that disclosure would be “detrimental to the national security.” The so-called areas which the government deems “sensitive”? These include smartphones, internet-enablers and a whole gamut of technology. Dr Gerald F. Ross invented an anti-electromagnetic-transmissions-jammer and had to wait nearly four decades before it got approved. In the interim, who knows what kind of info the Department of Defense managed to glean from it.
The current list of technology areas that is used to screen patent applications for possible restriction under the Invention Secrecy Act is not publicly available and has been denied under the Freedom of Information Act. (An appeal is pending.) But a previous list dated 1971 and obtained by researcher Michael Ravnitzky is available here pdf. Most of the listed technology areas are closely related to military applications. But some of them range more widely.
In 1971, under US government secrecy orders on page 14 solar pholtaic cell technology is subject to review and possible restriction if patents for solar photovoltaic generators were more than 20% efficient. Energy conversion systems were likewise subject to review and possible restriction if they offered conversion efficiencies “in excess of 70-80%.” The world has since improved solar panel efficiency to 25%… And some scientists from the land down under have come up with solar panels that up to 46% efficient. Who knows how much faster we’d have gotten there if the US government did not try so hard to keep quite so many secrets to itself, or how much slower if it had been American scientists filing those patents. For over 12 years, the Ford Motor Company has sold in Europe the Ford Focus that gets 80 mpg. It’s not authorized here in the United States. It’s not the only manufacturer that sells much higher mpg vehicles in Europe. Yet, there are more technologies in the field of energy that the public at large will ever be allowed to use personally. The world plan appears to be Klaus Schwabb’s view of it. You will own nothing and be happy.
Regarding suppressed technologies, the question needing to be asked is if disclosure of such technologies could really be “detrimental to the national security,” or whether the opposite would be closer to the truth? I suspect the latter. This question would then leads us to the next logical question of what comparable advances in technology may be subject to restriction and non-disclosure today? No answers have been forthcoming, and the invention secrecy system persists with no discernible external review.
Under the Invention Secrecy Act of 1951, secrecy orders may be imposed on patent applications when a government agency finds that granting the patent and publishing it would be “detrimental” to national security.
The U.S. Patent office is place to which ongoing corruption occurs. It appears the Rothschild banking cartel has gained complete control of it. I am not exaggerating this either. I believe that Serco is running that shit show. The USPO outsources the examination of patent applications to outside companies, such as ‘Global Patent Solutions’.
Interesting, I found that it was cellulose acetate butyrate with aluminum powder. Not flamable like the rocket scientists theory, but leaves a nice metalic look while making the covering weather tight and resistant to impacts (hail stones?)
Thank you for inspiring to dig a little deeper.
What is little-known about the Hindenburg was that the fabric covering was painted with an aluminum and iron-oxide based paint. These are coincidentally the ingredients of thermite. Any kind of spark would be capable of lighting it off and it would proceed rapidly across the covering, as indeed the photography shows. The destruction of the covering would mean loss of hydrogen and the airship would founder, as it did, with the released hydrogen being consumed in flames above.
Airships are lovely...but they are slow. Maybe several times as fast as an ocean liner. Airplanes were already much faster by that time.
That was what I was referring to as the doping compound. However the Doping compound on the Hindenburg was cellulose acetate butyrate mixed with aluminum powder of which is not a flamable compound. The source of this rumor comes from a rocket scientist referring to the usage of the aluminum powder often used in solid fuel rockets.
https://www.airships.net/hindenburg-paint/
Crazy that the whole project got shelved. Imagine we all have personal blimps...better than living in a van!