Re. the "Forbidden Languages" discussion,
in fairness to
@FatPhil and
@MapperGuy (and
@REMEMBEREDLANGUAGES) it was initially "my bad" in post #80.
I commented on post #79 without grasping the context, which
@Mendel clarified.
But, like some of the other incidents/ materials referred to in the debrief document (the thread subject) I don't think there can be
any doubt that the Forgotten Languages (FL) website is utter bunk.
The "The Art of Jamming Gravitational Waves Communications Systems: Taming those who tamed gravity" section
https://forgottenlanguages-full.for...6/the-art-of-jamming-gravitational-waves.html
is reliant on the reader believing that a number of fantasy technologies (gravity control, military "orbs") exist.
The "encrypted" sections contain identifiable acronyms (HFGW) that are specific to the author's topic; real codes don't do that- it indicates the subject of the coded message, doing part of the SIGINT/ codebreaker's work for them.
E.g., in years gone by, if you were intercepting UK military communications and had limited decryption resources, you might prioritise messages with "AAC" in clear (Army Air Corps: helicopters) over messages with "ACC" (Army Catering Corps).
The Forgotten Languages author uses acronyms (whose meanings are stated in-article) "in clear" in the "encoded" sections- they are teasers. It's an exercise in semiotics- "This [fictitious] technology is so important we can only discuss it in code".
Someone's put quite a bit of work into the FL website, but like the elaborate materials put online by Malcolm Bendall
...it's not so much a contribution to scientific understanding as, arguably, a piece of outsider art.
Perhaps the real issue (getting back on topic after the diversion I mistakenly caused) is, was the "debrief document" actually supplied to Congress members, and if so, in what context?
Were they explicitly made aware that many of the cases described in the document, and some of the "sources" mentioned (e.g. the FL site) are not reconcilable with reality?