DIRECT 2.0 is a HOAX!
OK, I am making the call right here, right now on InsideKSC.com. remember, you heard it first right here. The Direct 2.0 flap is a hoax. It is rife with classic non-disprovable claims. News editors and some journalist have failed to adequately protect their readers, listeners, and viewers from those non-disprovable claims, thus fomenting public bias and prejudice against NASA and the Boeing Company.
Some in the news media have been swayed by the elaborate nature of the DIRECT 2.0 hoax, but not a single journalist or editor that we know of has demanded independent verification of Ross' claims before going to press. If an editor did seek verification, then they did not publish the DIRECT 2.0 claims, because those claims are not verifiable. The raw technical aspects of Jupiter-120 are verifiable, but those are borrowed from the old NASA study that DIRECT 2.0 liberally borrowed from. Some impressive looking Adobe .pdf documents and a lot of pseudo-technical gobbledygook and rhetoric have fooled a lot of people.
Unfortunately for the DIRECT 2.0 hoaxers, they cannot produce a single, qualified, current or former NASA or Boeing propulsion engineer to step up to the plate and present his credentials. It is claimed that there are fifty-seven engineers working after-hours and behind the scenes on DIRECT 2.0. That particular claim is a classic non-disprovable claim.
There are plenty of ways for one of those engineers to step forward in guaranteed anonymity, with verifiable engineering credentials in hand to defend DIRECT 2.0. My public offer to protect the identity of one of those alleged engineers was ignored and my post containing that offer on the hottest DIRECT 2.0 web forum (At least before it was dumped by the web site owner) was conveniently deleted several times.
The DIRECT 2.0 claims that those engineers are in fear of losing their jobs. That claims makes little sense as the .pdf files and web forum posting allegedly created by those engineers and their friends are loaded with more than adequate computer forensic evidence to trace them back to their originators. Engineers understand computing technology and how all files and internet packets leave a forensic trail.
It would be idiotic for one of the alleged engineers to share their files in the manner we have witnessed with the DIRECT 2.0 flap. Boeing and NASA each employs very good computer forensic and security experts. Those alleged rogue employees would effectively be handing in a resignation by betraying the majority of their fellow employees and bosses with their documentary trail of emails and document files, so why not just step up to the plate and hold a news conference rather than surreptitiously stir up controversy and angst.
What worse? A job fearing coward or a deceitful liar? Either step up to the plate or drop your pretentious DIRECT 2.0 campaigning, if you exist Mr or Ms DIRECT 2.0 engineer.
There is dissent in almost every workplace, including NASA and Boeing, but it is most likely that there is not one legitimate, mentally healthy engineer working on DIRECT 2.0, much less fifty-seven of them. Remember, you read this first on InsideKSC.com. The editors at the news agencies who went to press with unverified DIRECT 2.0 claims are not likely to print retractions. I am sure that they are hoping that DIRECT 2.0 will slowly fade out of public memory. It will.
Bookmarks