Continuation of my thought flow from:
http://www.sproutfuel.com/2022/07/classified-materials-destruxtion.htmlPart of the issue I'm contemplating is the classified nature of several programs that affect certain individuals and possibly the environment at large. Though I'm not a conspiracy theorist-- I am the daughter of a former government printer/USAF officer
and grew up understanding some things about issues around classified documents, including torture. To add to my torture complaint the absolute lunacy in having to be aware of such classified issues as a toddler.
The FAA document about destruction of classified materials other than documents includes a melting and mutilation. So I began to wonder how exactly the change
Of the form of an element is considered destruction as say, an ice cube melts into a small water puddle. How about the less popular yet current Graphene explosions? Are they mutilation of graphene? Graphene semiconductor related, or simply still stuffed into the ionic plasma verbology of DARPA?
And starting with a 1959 Norththrop Grumman Space and Mission Systems Corp patent US 3222675A
that https://patents.google.com/patent/US3222675A/en
Is this truly absolute ludicrous (especially given today's nanotechnology)? To have classified destruction of non-documents to be melted!? And with today's Nanotechnology use, known and unknown-- what is the ink used for printing of documents or 3d printing of images?
After the earlier post I simply expressed my issue verbally to a sympathetic activist. However, I did refrain from explaining the patent. And how changing of form of elements and nanotechnologies (both organic and synthetic in form) has been changed to terminologies such as vaporization, Extreme Ultraviolet exposure, Avalanche to name a few.
Btw: if you have followed my blog, you may have noticed a surveillance software or bot presence that tampers with my writing from time to time. So far my main known suspect is a Grammatech security surveillance grant project/DARPA. So, I frequently post drafts, as there are excessive issues each time I open a document to edit.
When I found this article,
https://atsduct.com/reference/flammable-vapor-systems/
the "insurance" issue emerged as the destruction of a building probably not built by Hensel Phelps - one of many WMD grade construction contractors.
One old citing of semiconductor flammable vapor in insurance consideration:
And there are of course several about Graphene explosions and flammability from the past.
Ie.,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0008622314001274
Current backing developments in reduction of flammability of graphene.
Qq w
