Pentagon releases UFO footage

keyser said:
It's been said on twitter that the reason they are so annoying and seem to be dicking around rather than actually landing is because they must be billionaire aliens in their spacecraft. Now that is more plausible. :)
Click to expand...

Douglas Adams wrote something similar long before Twitter existed. It's in the Hitchhikers series. Brilliantly phrased, as you'd expect, but the gist of it was that they were adolescent aliens messing with people from primitive (to them) civilisations for their own amusement.
 
Secret_Window said:
That true, but how do you separate what is theirs and what is ours today?

Also I have mentioned this before, and I do think things often get mixed up.

Regarding top-secet projects, I think it's very real we have technologies that are beyond our public understanding, but the problem is when hysteria runs rampant.

A good example of hysteria running away with things is Roswell.

A scientist came forward several years ago who was involved in the Roswell incident. He revealed that the US government had developed a top secret project with the intention of listening to nuclear experiments from the Soviets. The technology used in the project involved sending up a large balloon with a payload that had a highly tuned microphone that was designed to detect nuclear explosions from 3000 miles away. The technology was based on ultrasound.

The codename for the project was incidentally called "flying disc" and unfortunately in testing the balloon got ripped to shreds in the atmosphere and crashed down in Roswell.

Afterwards, the Roswell airforce was then tasked to recover the crashed balloon. This was so that the Soviets did not discover that the US government had the technology to listen for Soviet nuclear bomb testing.

However due to the press and media relentlessly trying to find out what the crash was, they did partly uncover the project name "flying disc". But the name "flying disc" then became "flying saucer" due to the media trying to make headline stories and sell newspapers, and then it just took off into a form of its own which became a completely different version of events. But the US government didn't mind, because it distracted people from what the real secret was.
Click to expand...
What was really significant about the sightings reported by the USS Omaha was it wasn't up until the impliment action of a new radar for the battlegroup of 14 ships that the objects were identified. That suggests the ships could have perpetually been monitored by these objects prior to their eventual discovery. Furthermore, at one point it was suggested there was over a hundred of them observing the ships-some of which were observed leaving and return the atmosphere.

I'm wondering whether it was decided by somebody making decisions it was no longer feasible or even practical to deny or debunk the incidents due to the amounts of personnel involved with the sightings/incident. Let's not forget there have been numerous reports of similar incidents like this over air force bases and nuclear facilities -so this type of incident isn't new. What used to receive the roll eyes from me was the constant bleating from the military higher ups-there was nothing of any defence significance? Initially the military were calling the UAP's drones? But now they are unknowns. Something has changed-even if it be slightly.
 
ethan said:
What was really significant about the sightings reported by the USS Omaha was it wasn't up until the impliment action of a new radar for the battlegroup of 14 ships that the objects were identified. That suggests the ships could have perpetually been monitored by these objects prior to their eventual discovery. Furthermore, at one point it was suggested there was over a hundred of them observing the ships-some of which were observed leaving and return the atmosphere.

I'm wondering whether it was decided by somebody making decisions it was no longer feasible or even practical to deny or debunk the incidents due to the amounts of personnel involved with the sightings/incident. Let's not forget there have been numerous reports of similar incidents like this over air force bases and nuclear facilities -so this type of incident isn't new. What used to receive the roll eyes from me was the constant bleating from the military higher ups-there was nothing of any defence significance? Initially the military were calling the UAP's drones? But now they are unknowns. Something has changed-even if it be slightly.
Click to expand...

I think we need to remain objective and say what is being detected now might not be the same as what was seen and witnessed in the 1940s.

It might be alien, but it might be very advanced experimental military craft. How does anyone tell the difference?

I also think it's very interesting these UFOs/UAPs are seen around nuclear weapon facilities and military - and the evidence so far does seem to show that. If I were to guess, it might be possible too that they are testing this experimental tech against their own - which might explain the lack of decent evidence from outside military incidents from the public (no decent video footage, images etc).
 
Th0nt said:
They didnt (at least not always) come from them, the comets sometimes just nuked enough life and triggered an ice age that the existing biology diversified to adapt.
Click to expand...


True.

But the very start of life did.

We are just a by product of the life soup. :)
 
Lysander said:
[..]
This part addresses the bird issue:
Click to expand...

And it's provably wrong. The fact that they're a pilot doesn't make them an ornithologist - expertise in one area doesn't automatically mean expertise in another area. Not that expertise is required in this case because the statements they make about birds are so obviously wrong. Some birds routinely fly at heights of more than 2,000 feet. Birds have been directly, reliably and repeatedly detected flying at more than 10 times that height. Also, birds aren't required to fly in a flock. It's possible for a bird to fly solo.
 
Secret_Window said:
I think we need to remain objective and say what is being detected now might not be the same as what was seen and witnessed in the 1940s.

It might be alien, but it might be very advanced experimental military craft. How does anyone tell the difference?

I also think it's very interesting these UFOs/UAPs are seen around nuclear weapon facilities and military - and the evidence so far does seem to show that. If I were to guess, it might be possible too that they are testing this experimental tech against their own - which might explain the lack of decent evidence from outside military incidents from the public (no decent video footage, images etc).
Click to expand...

The public don't have a clue about either the physics involved in using a camera or a phone with regard to their limitations in taking a decent picture . I've lost count of the amount of comments in GD bizzarely asking given the amount of phones people carry, why there aren't any decent picture of UFO's at night? The answer being you need a certain amount of light to take a decent picture or alternatively have to keep the shutter open-which is next to impossible when photographing moving objects that won't come out blurred. Furthermore I can think of one case involving an academic in South Wales who attempted to photograph a UFO which did not show up in his image. There must have been an incredible amount of technology involving meta materials for that.
 
Back from late May this chat with NDT was quite interesting. Rogan says he believes these things are probes/unmanned and I said before that if it turns out the are non-earth in origin, then this is what they are too.

 
ethan said:
[..] Furthermore I can think of one case involving an academic in South Wales who attempted to photograph a UFO which did not show up in his image. There must have been an incredible amount of technology involving meta materials for that.
Click to expand...

Or the UFO wasn't actually there. Or the UFO took remote control of the camera (which nowadays was probably a wirelessly networked computer with a camera built into it and with the image processing done by the computer, so remote control of it is at least potentially possible) and edited out the UFO from the image. Or the manufacturer of the camera is part of the conspiracy and has made the camera automatically edit out images of UFOs.

Materials that somehow reflect light that can be detected by the optical sensors in human eyes and simultaneously don't reflect light that can be detected by the optical sensors in a camera that detects the same wavelengths of light as a human eye is something I'd consider much less likely than any of the above explanations. How could that work?
 
ethan said:
The public don't have a clue about either the physics involved in using a camera or a phone with regard to their limitations in taking a decent picture . I've lost count of the amount of comments in GD bizzarely asking given the amount of phones people carry, why there aren't any decent picture of UFO's at night? The answer being you need a certain amount of light to take a decent picture or alternatively have to keep the shutter open-which is next to impossible when photographing moving objects that won't come out blurred. Furthermore I can think of one case involving an academic in South Wales who attempted to photograph a UFO which did not show up in his image. There must have been an incredible amount of technology involving meta materials for that.
Click to expand...

Yes, I actually agree with you that most people are incapable of operating a phone correctly and that we may also not have the means to capture them properly with the available phone camera technology - given the US Navy was using very sophisticated tech to capture what they have.

However, my point was more trying to say that the public do not appear to have had the same scale incidents - where it seems these craft are deliberately probing radar and air space and testing our response - especially in the numbers that was described by the US navy. This again is why I take the view that this could be an experimental technology that is being tested against our own military defences.

I would like to speculate further and say that it might also even be foreign powers testing us, especially when you look at also how far economically and technologically the Chinese for example have come in recent years.

I look forward to the report...
 
ethan said:
The public don't have a clue about either the physics involved in using a camera or a phone with regard to their limitations in taking a decent picture . I've lost count of the amount of comments in GD bizzarely asking given the amount of phones people carry, why there aren't any decent picture of UFO's at night? The answer being you need a certain amount of light to take a decent picture or alternatively have to keep the shutter open-which is next to impossible when photographing moving objects that won't come out blurred. Furthermore I can think of one case involving an academic in South Wales who attempted to photograph a UFO which did not show up in his image. There must have been an incredible amount of technology involving meta materials for that.
Click to expand...

So what is the excuse for the hovering UFOs?
 
I totally buy the fact that using unmanned things to probe is what any species would do given how we send in robots to detonate bombs, dive to unthinkable depths and explore places like mars.

Now apart from the potential theory that these other beings have an underwater base or are stealing all our precious scarce resources before our eyes - I dont entertain the part where they hover over a piece of water tic-tac'ing about randomly just for the craic. This is why I go to the sticky wicket of manned or unmanned, why would you deploy a half arsed measure to avoid detection (radar jammers) but a) dont cloak in some way b) are present on the heat sensors c) dont adapt from both a+b after multiple events making you implement extra measures so you become incredibly undetectable as otherwise the Earthlings have rumbled you otherwise...?
 
mrk said:
Back from late May this chat with NDT was quite interesting. Rogan says he believes these things are probes/unmanned and I said before that if it turns out the are non-earth in origin, then this is what they are too.

Click to expand...
I took away something different from that video from NDT :)
People often quote "this happened". No, an instrument detected something. OK, now I'm interested in how reliable we can trust this instrument.
Rogan "they saw it though"
NDT "not at 80,000 feet"
lol good point :)

This is where I'm at. If the evidence was amazing it would be self evident what that is. To me, it isn't. But I'm not going to stop people from seeking this stuff out, go get em!.. and bring back better data. Thanks :)
That's why scientists aren't all that bothered about UFOs because the sample size of data is 1 blurry video and hearsay. They have nothing to go on.
 
keyser said:
I took away something different from that video from NDT :)
People often quote "this happened". No, an instrument detected something. OK, now I'm interested in how reliable we can trust this instrument.
Rogan "they saw it though"
NDT "not at 80,000 feet"
lol good point :)

This is where I'm at. If the evidence was amazing it would be self evident what that is. To me, it isn't. But I'm not going to stop people from seeking this stuff out, go get em!.. and bring back better data. Thanks :)
That's why scientists aren't all that bothered about UFOs because the sample size of data is 1 blurry video and hearsay. They have nothing to go on.
Click to expand...

I am inclined to agree. Been waiting for actual big name scientists and physicists like NDT to have their say on these recent developments. Sure the US navy have come out and said they have seen these things do stuff that displays tech we humans do not have the capability to do and their instruments recorded that happening. From a scientific point of view that's great, but the data gathered needs to be more in-depth and the devices recording that data needs to be scrutinised like how a scientific paper is peer-reviewed to the ballsack.

I still believe that these things do exist, there's no denying that. But we simply do not have all the boxes ticked along with pixel perfect footage, just highly credible eye witness accounts and instrument readings that have gone public. Maybe there's an underlying motive behind it all who knows right now apart from them but I get the feeling we will soon find out.

The other thing that I always found interesting was that the Astronauts who went to the moon in later years said they saw stuff in space. I can't imagine why they would make up a story at their ripe old ages. So yeah I do believe there is something going on and some form of disclosure has been long in the making.

I do not believe alien beings have visited or are visiting Earth though. More inclined to believe if something has, it is artificially intelligent as this is also our distant future for exploring space and beyond in terms of evolution with the kind of talks the tech industry is having lately like uploading human consciousness to a computer etc.
 
Haha never seen this dude before he is quite amusing: "maintain your alien belief system" must remember that acronym (ABS). :cry::cry:

kinetic747 said:
If extra terrestrial life does exist, it'll blow the minds of all those who don't even believe in evolution on earth. :D
Click to expand...

Yeah the flat earthers will have a conniption.
 
keyser said:
I took away something different from that video from NDT :)
People often quote "this happened". No, an instrument detected something. OK, now I'm interested in how reliable we can trust this instrument.
Rogan "they saw it though"
NDT "not at 80,000 feet"
lol good point :)

This is where I'm at. If the evidence was amazing it would be self evident what that is. To me, it isn't. But I'm not going to stop people from seeking this stuff out, go get em!.. and bring back better data. Thanks :)
That's why scientists aren't all that bothered about UFOs because the sample size of data is 1 blurry video and hearsay. They have nothing to go on.
Click to expand...

I agree completely. We need more data. So much stuff that people take as evidence for UFOs being Aliens are based on eyewitness reports that do not provide any evidence - they could be so many things other than alien space craft. The recent US Navy evidence is somewhat helpful because now we can open up the discussion more as to what this particular evidence might be, but in no way provides substantial evidence to back up and corroborate previous eyewitness reports from the public - maybe earlier military eyewitness resports but even those are kinda sketchy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom