It's been long enough since the Chinese demonstration that they could
have built a specific purpose satellite and flown it up there.

-Adam

On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 4:02 AM, Apptech <apptech@paradise.net.nz> wrote:
> > I learned that the missile was non-explosive - they needed
>  > a direct
>  > hit with a chunk of metal, rather than a fly-near with an
>  > explosive -
>  > much more impressive with a satellite moving at 17,000mph.
>  >
>  > Given the action and expense they took, I have a hard time
>  > believing
>  > it was just for show, toxic fuel, or even sensitive
>  > components.  I
>  > wonder if they blew up a shell, and the real (stealth)
>  > satellite is
>  > still out there...
>  >
>  > Love conspiracy theories.
>
>  Best believable theory is (IMHO) that it was a capability
>  demonstration, both to themselves, and to those who they
>  wish to demonstrate that they have the capability. "Don't
>  bother putting up a satellite to cover the area, if we don't
>  want it there it can be disappeared on cue ...".
>
>
>         Russell
>
>  --
>
>
> http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
>  View/change your membership options at
>  http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
>



-- 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Moving in southeast Michigan? Buy my house: http://ubasics.com/house/

Interested in electronics? Check out the projects at http://ubasics.com

Building your own house? Check out http://ubasics.com/home/
-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist