Seeing Adam's relay and the youtube relays again,

this fucker is again, stating something about Helicopters.

 

First of all, i had a hunch it might have had something in this.

as that was much later after I tackled on my airplane ideas.

and that was a left over industry.

 

Of course I would never present an idea that is someone else's.

 

What it must be, it followed up on my principles in the airplanes,

and other ideas about safety, with flying vehicles,

and applied it on the industry i missed.

or bothered not trying as it's basically the same.

 

please look into the details of my idea. with the MS Paint diagram.

details an't be the same.

 

I have no idea what it presented,

but there are only so many permutations on a helicopter to land in safety.

this is deductable logic, that must have a coincidence, but not in detail.

only core things permutationally obvious, perhaps.

 

what is important is,

if my principles from my other ideas prior to it, were used.

key terms,  if it correlates to its helicopter idea.

 

the repeating factors are: "ejection" (separation of cabin)
"parachute" (which was used in multiple vehicles, only few ways)
"rockets" (of course again, many vehicles, only few ways to counter gravity)

what follows logically, in order for parachute to work in a confined area

where blades are rotating above, the blades may need to be ejected,
and then the parachutes follow the release. The blades will get in the way.
of which i have designed the locking mechanism through MS Paint.

IF that is the factor in coincidence was allocated, then that is logical reasoning that correlates.

What must be seen are my ideas prior to it, and see how it is being re-used as concept

again and again. And Steve has only FOLLOWED-UP in re-usage of my ideas.

some things, however, by logic, may overlap, but not in detail.

 

So one needs to see the timing in that.

 

This person, as you have seen, infinitely. Is an absolute conscience-less monster.

It will create doubt. But that doubt, only proceeds, when you see it from a surface level.

 

Furthermore, amongst ALL the ideas it tried stealing,

and, this idea. This is mine. The helicopter.

but let's say it wasn't.

That is simply 1. It is perjury, NOT attempting destruction like he has.

1 amongst many that exists, that is my ideas. Of which it partially confessed, more recently.

Stating that it was following up.

 

And NO. I would never present something that is his, but especially after all the flight related ideas.

This is why i'm not workign right now. In some industries overlaps are inevitable.

And if someone like Steve, is hellbent on framing going across what is obvious.

Then eventually, it works to my disadvantage because of its lethal intent.

 

And my being blind, I may falsely believe that my idea is something unique,

and then present it, only to later discover, that is something logically linear,

and someone like Steve had already covered it, and is using it against me.

 

Please understand, I would never risk such a thing.

 

So I am being framed. I have always been.

 

And I can't see how after that 'partial confession' which was done more recently,

stating that it was 'easy' just following up on my ideas as copycats, or re-using it in different industries,

after stating its fundamental nature,

 

how is it that... it was considered as 'partial', instead the whole?

did it attempt to misdirect its initial confession?

did it attempt to gaslight?

that is the same with the original, first confession.

 

Please understand what this person is.

And investigate further into whatever framing it does.

 

Truly, had I stolen 1 idea. I have to say it. I would be fearful of overlaps.

I have no clue what it has presented.